AntiGod education should not be compulsary (even for non wealthy)

no you don't it is a religion. It's also hypocritical to deny it. It's faith, and doctrine, no more married to science than creation is. Say it all you want it just ain't so, sorry, the jigs up! I show you it makes claims against Him. Not at all, lose the evolution old age part, or stop compelling kids to learn it.

"Def. 4 is that of a scientific theory" Good then teach creation science in school.

"One view of faith being espoused by a government endangers all views of faith" So stop pushing it! Since you will not admit to pushing this dream tale of some little one celled creature being the Ceator, then at least we could also say, by the same token as your statement, "NO view of faith espoused by a school endangers all views of faith" In God we trust? here he is kids, now just wait till you see this little guy's commandments!

quote:

---

we show you how evolution is religion neutral

---

quote:

---

no you don't it is a religion. It's also hypocritical to deny it. It's faith, and doctrine, no more married to science than creation is. Say it all you want it just ain't so, sorry, the jigs up!

---

Provide evidence for your assertions. How is evolution faith-based? How is evolution not science? You have a lot to do here, so I suggest you get started. One more thing, dictionary definitions and saying the same thing over and over again aren't evidences for your viewpoint.

Provide support for your statements or STFU.

Before this gets a bit nasty perhaps a definition of what makes something a religion would be a good idea.14gipper, this discussion has been had before. You need to tell us how you define religion. Be aware that you have to have it narrow enough not to result in anything being a religion.Some definitions, like "anything that someone makes a center of their life" can end up including football and baseball. So unless you agree that they are religions too then you have to have a somewhat narrower definition.Most take religion to be something that is taken on faith not evidence and involves the supernatural. How is that for you?Once you have a clear definition then you are in a position to show our evolutionary science (or if you include it physics, geology and cosmology) is a religion by your definition.Without that foundation you are simply making assertions. I don't take simple assertions from used car salesmen about the shape of the jalopy I might buy without some proof. No one here will take your assertions as meaning a darn thing without some evidence and reasoning.If you can't supply more than assertions then you should, indeed, become quieter. Much, much quieter.

In the land of "what if", what would your "creation science theory" content be? You may wish to consult one or more of the below, the existing topics on creation theories. Does some creationist organization have a curriculum proposal available? Not that I know of. "what is a scientific theory of creation"
"Trueorigins Theory of Creation"
"A scientific theory for creation"
"A Request for Tranquility Base"Perhaps especially the last on the list. It was centered on a "creation science" class content outline, put forward by currently inactive creationist member Tranquility Base.Start a new topic, "14gipper's Creation Science Course Outline". We could make it a "Great Debate" topic, between you and me. If so, I propose Buzsaw as a moderator, if a special moderator is called for.MoosePs: Better make sure your plan isn't something someone can find to be anti-God.
{Edited to fix last link - M}[This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 02-09-2004]

how is belief in God faith based? You have to believe it without 100% evidence! Either side can claim some, even a lot of evidence, but when you get down, you just gotta believe it.
As far as dictionary definituions, perhaps we should toss them out of school, as well, since you get sore at them not all being revised yet to give more glory to your wonder theory.
As far as turning nasty, as someone said. I see no need. I stated my opinion that it's got to be God or nothing, if it's mandatory. If newcomers, witches, or pagans, or ateists, or undecided joe citizen, can't have a system that reflects, not a religion (like evolution)or catholisism, etc. But an aknowledment and respect for a Christian God,-(In God we trust-one nation under God etc.)then make a godless education sysytem, but do not compel attendance. Otherwise, as it seems actually, all the wishing aside, the nation is doomed. The heart and soul and very God has been ripped out, and (regardless of still having to allow kids to parade outside pole praying)peoples hearts and wills are not with you. Peoples votes, and money is not with you. God is not with you, and can not win your battles, and protect you. And on it goes till you take your place in the ash heap of countries who rejected God, and were left to your demise. Nasty? no, pity- for the children held to ransom by the state godless system-and the country no longer able to seemingly do anything about it, except 'fiddle' while the last vestiges of their godly heritage are destroyed.{Fixed quote box - AM}[This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 02-09-2004]

quote:

---

So stop pushing it! Since you will not admit to pushing this dream tale of some little one celled creature being the Ceator, then at least we could also say, by the same token as your statement, "NO view of faith espoused by a school endangers all views of faith"

---

I repeat, show how evolution is not good science and that it is religious. Evolution does not say that a unicellular organism is the "creator". You do. One of evolution's counterpart theories, the theory of common descent, states that all organisms alive today share a common ancestry. I have provided four lines of evidence for this in another post. Common ancestry, and therefore, evolution , start with the first cell. What came before that is being studied extensively and would not hurt the theory of common descent one bit. In fact, all the evidences for how organic macromolecules formed from inorganic gases are so prevalent and diverse that we can assume it happened when some form of energy interacted with volcanic gases in an oxygen-free environment. Several experiments are being done that show how cells could have developed. This is science. It moves forward and makes discoveries. Creationism makes no discoveries. It only seeks to justify ancient myths and non-scientific ideas.The last line of yours is just ignorant, especially if it is your view of faith that you want pushed.

quote:

---

In God we trust? here he is kids, now just wait till you see this little guy's commandments!

---

Where would they be written? Maybe in its genome!?! Hmmm...psst...saying that evolution is my view of faith and that i am pushing my faith on my kids is not a valid argument. You have to show how evolution is religious first, then you would have the start of something important to say. Otherwise you only offer hubris.

Quoting myself:

quote:

---

Ps: Better make sure your plan isn't something someone can find to be anti-God.

---

It has just ocurred to me, that the number of mainstream Christians who find fundimentalist creationism to be "anti-God", probably far excedes the number of fundimentalist Christians who find evolution to be "anti-God".Moose

---

Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.
"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham

Show anywhere in Chemistry/Biology/Physics/Political Science/Anthropology....zzzzzzz....oops I'm sorry what was your point?????? This is not proof, AND certainly not a rebuttal. So, back to the point that you have not rebutted YET!!Provide proof that evolution, specifically ToE is AntiGod!Just because a subject does not involve god does not make it Anti-God, but I shouldn't have to tell you that.

When you can match Dr. Frankenstein's work, we'll see if you can get the whole beast, and if it's a better beast than God made. Even if your great white hope of creating a cell ever happens, would you not still have some work to do? The old witches and gods used to turn people into half man half beast didn't they? Now they're called something else, and are working on things like mixing the genes of a goat and a spider, and all kinds of things! A tinkerer, a tailor, and if you are right, when you get real fancy a one cell maker-but God? No. Meanwhile, before your mad scientists manage to get every one implanted with some kind of chip to maybe control the free will out of us-we will have God-and freedom, no matter how god-like you think you are. We don't chose you for our God! You're fired! says you. Anyhow the little teacher only has so much power-you need to do pretty well what you are told in school. You can't teach anything that is at odds with the curriculum too much? So, those who force people to pay for the operation, and choose the things to include in schools have most of the power here. Your opinion is important, and what you revel in teaching is a concern. But if you want to get payed you basically teach what you are told. I have heard of some teachers who wished they could try to include God in the teachings a lot more. Just because something has some science to it does not mean it has to be taught. The Russians apparently were doing studies some years ago in the paranormal. Many feel there is esp, and such, and perhaps would like to scientifically study it. Does that mean elementary school children are not being taught science if the course isn't offered? Science is a big concept, and not all of it is appropriate! We need to measure, if we have some faith, which aspects of science we prefer. Yes, I don't want people creating big insect/animal crosses with gene tinkering for example, (if they could) for say war purposes, and forcing children to learn hoe to do it. Or, how to kill unborn children, and use their remains for 'scientific' purposes! It is more important to have a godly education, and learn right from wrong, and use what parts of knowledge accordingly that we need. Otherwise we get the package deal of the Garden, where poor Eve thought the tree of knowledge, as explained to her by the first evolutionist-good and evil- and death and misery! let's take the good, and shew away the evil, and give the kids a break.

Are you suggesting you can provide proof that it is pro Christ?

You state something, you are the thread starter, it is up to you to provide proof for your claims, so do it! BUT, to be nice the Egyptians were documenting events and such long before the Bible was compiled or even the writers that wrote what is compiled. The two responses I have so far will be what I will answer, you are making too many unsubstantiated claims for me to keep up.So, just answer "the oldest book" and the "evolution is AntiGod" claims for now.

OK if your revelation is right-be careful-one poster here told me a revelation is a sure sign it's a religion! (revelatory)("Act of revealing;that which is revealed:")
I went to a catholic school, where they taught about Adam and Eve, and parables of the most influential Man who ever lived, does this mean that it was "fundamentalist"? Now I would say it was religious, reflecting a particular denomination, but I do not believe this was why seperation of church and state needed to be introduced-to protect us fron learning about God! But rather to protect us from the kind of things going on in Europe, that so many had tried to get away from. But when you start to let Pagans & co steal the whole show, and try to use things against even believing in God, I would think the balance was lost, and needs to be corrected. Not just in the U.S. but I think believers everywhere need to stop being afraid to demand the freedom to have God in their education of their children, and if it can't be through a public system, then so be it. Time to flush!