Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creationism in Schools
LudvanB
Inactive Member


Message 32 of 116 (4839)
02-17-2002 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by Mister Pamboli
02-17-2002 1:16 PM


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...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Mister Pamboli, posted 02-17-2002 1:16 PM Mister Pamboli has not replied

  
KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 7883 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 33 of 116 (4851)
02-17-2002 5:50 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by nator
02-17-2002 10:48 AM


quote:
Originally posted by schrafinator:
Yes, it IS "pure bull plop" that:
slavery is illegal
women are allowed to vote
black people are allowed to vote
black people enjoy full citizenship
18 year olds are allowed to vote
Senators are elected by direct popular vote
a poll tax may not be levied
the District of Columbia gets a presidential vote in the electoral college
we have plans for what to do if the president/VP dies
Let's see, other than that, we limited term length for presidents,
changed the timing of presidential and congressional terms, we installed then repealed prohibition (they cancel each other out), and income taxes were authorized.
Only the last one seems to be at all interpretable as having to do with government getting more power, and that's highly debatable.
You were saying? Since you say that "most" of the amendments after the Bill of Rights were bull-plop, could you identify which of the above you were talking about?
[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 02-17-2002]

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by nator, posted 02-17-2002 10:48 AM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by mark24, posted 02-17-2002 8:03 PM KingPenguin has replied

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 5195 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 34 of 116 (4866)
02-17-2002 8:03 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by KingPenguin
02-17-2002 5:50 PM


quote:
Originally posted by KingPenguin:
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.

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]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by KingPenguin, posted 02-17-2002 5:50 PM KingPenguin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by KingPenguin, posted 02-17-2002 9:43 PM mark24 has not replied

  
KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 7883 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 35 of 116 (4875)
02-17-2002 9:43 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by mark24
02-17-2002 8:03 PM


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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by mark24, posted 02-17-2002 8:03 PM mark24 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by nator, posted 02-18-2002 11:22 AM KingPenguin has not replied

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 36 of 116 (4879)
02-17-2002 10:01 PM


No one likes responding too much toward my posts as much as KP's and such. Hows come?
------------------

  
toff
Inactive Member


Message 37 of 116 (4916)
02-18-2002 6:11 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by TrueCreation
02-16-2002 3:34 PM


quote:
Originally posted by TrueCreation:
"In the Us, it is illegal to teach religion scripture has scripture. If creationism was a better theory than evo, then it would be taught in schools, as it would not be only religious, but also highly credible and therefore the closest to the truth about our origins.
if this happened, which never will, we would see mass conversions to christianity."
--Who said that we had to teach creationism? Who said we had to teach faith? Who said we had to teach religion? If you know the model of Creationism, you would know that you can teach creation science (If your going to call it that) without even mentioning the bible, faith, or religion.

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.)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by TrueCreation, posted 02-16-2002 3:34 PM TrueCreation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by nator, posted 02-18-2002 11:27 AM toff has not replied
 Message 40 by TrueCreation, posted 02-18-2002 11:45 AM toff has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 38 of 116 (4936)
02-18-2002 11:22 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by KingPenguin
02-17-2002 9:43 PM


quote:
Originally posted by KingPenguin:
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.

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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by KingPenguin, posted 02-17-2002 9:43 PM KingPenguin has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 39 of 116 (4937)
02-18-2002 11:27 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by toff
02-18-2002 6:11 AM


quote:
Originally posted by toff:
quote:
Originally posted by TrueCreation:
"In the Us, it is illegal to teach religion scripture has scripture. If creationism was a better theory than evo, then it would be taught in schools, as it would not be only religious, but also highly credible and therefore the closest to the truth about our origins.
if this happened, which never will, we would see mass conversions to christianity."
--Who said that we had to teach creationism? Who said we had to teach faith? Who said we had to teach religion? If you know the model of Creationism, you would know that you can teach creation science (If your going to call it that) without even mentioning the bible, faith, or religion.

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.)

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"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by toff, posted 02-18-2002 6:11 AM toff has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by TrueCreation, posted 02-18-2002 11:53 AM nator has replied

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 40 of 116 (4938)
02-18-2002 11:45 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by toff
02-18-2002 6:11 AM


"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.
------------------

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by toff, posted 02-18-2002 6:11 AM toff has not replied

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 41 of 116 (4939)
02-18-2002 11:53 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by nator
02-18-2002 11:27 AM


"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.
------------------

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by nator, posted 02-18-2002 11:27 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by LudvanB, posted 02-18-2002 12:37 PM TrueCreation has replied
 Message 48 by lbhandli, posted 02-18-2002 9:37 PM TrueCreation has not replied
 Message 61 by nator, posted 02-20-2002 11:36 AM TrueCreation has not replied

  
LudvanB
Inactive Member


Message 42 of 116 (4945)
02-18-2002 12:37 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by TrueCreation
02-18-2002 11:53 AM


quote:
Originally posted by TrueCreation:
"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.
LUD
k 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...
"There is no cohesive Creation "science"."
--Then teach it like it is braud, ie, there are many creation accounts, etc.
LUD:As i said,this i could agree with...as an optional course in school.
"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.
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.
"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.
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. 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". 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..!!!.". Science educates,it does not indoctrinate. 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?

[This message has been edited by LudvanB, 02-18-2002]
[This message has been edited by LudvanB, 02-18-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by TrueCreation, posted 02-18-2002 11:53 AM TrueCreation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by TrueCreation, posted 02-18-2002 4:53 PM LudvanB has replied

  
no2creation
Inactive Member


Message 43 of 116 (4962)
02-18-2002 4:51 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by TrueCreation
02-16-2002 8:04 PM


[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]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by TrueCreation, posted 02-16-2002 8:04 PM TrueCreation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by TrueCreation, posted 02-18-2002 5:20 PM no2creation has replied

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 44 of 116 (4963)
02-18-2002 4:53 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by LudvanB
02-18-2002 12:37 PM


"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.
------------------

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by LudvanB, posted 02-18-2002 12:37 PM LudvanB has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by lbhandli, posted 02-18-2002 5:13 PM TrueCreation has not replied
 Message 60 by LudvanB, posted 02-19-2002 1:49 AM TrueCreation has not replied
 Message 62 by nator, posted 02-20-2002 11:50 AM TrueCreation has not replied

  
lbhandli
Inactive Member


Message 45 of 116 (4966)
02-18-2002 5:13 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by TrueCreation
02-18-2002 4:53 PM


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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by TrueCreation, posted 02-18-2002 4:53 PM TrueCreation has not replied

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 46 of 116 (4968)
02-18-2002 5:20 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by no2creation
02-18-2002 4:51 PM


"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,"
------------------

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by no2creation, posted 02-18-2002 4:51 PM no2creation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by doctrbill, posted 02-19-2002 12:13 AM TrueCreation has not replied
 Message 59 by no2creation, posted 02-19-2002 1:06 AM TrueCreation has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024