[_ Old Earth _] 'Science & education should be subject to democracy'

[dad]

I am strongly against teaching theology as science,

That is what they do now, they leave the present where science applies, and use belief to imagine it always was and will be so. Nothing more.

 

[Barbarian]

No one is suggesting that anyone can force anyone to believe anything.

You can't even force children to listen to religious programming in public schools.

The reality is that reading the Bible openly, does not make people either Christian or religious in and of itself. I do feel that Bible reading in Public Institutions is challenging, thought provoking, and intellectually stimulating.

And illegal in science classes. You are writing a justification for teaching our children witchcraft. You might not think so, but if you can inject your religious beliefs, anyone else can inject theirs.

 

[LittleNipper]

I am strongly against teaching theology as science, and vice a versa. I would also be upset if they taught english in math, and woodworking in health. They do not belong together, but are, essentially, important things.

The day that my child goes to a public school and is forced to learn about how "God" made things, in science, is the day that I will have a long talk with the school, and either require them to teach about the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or drop creationism.

I also enjoy the invisible pink unicorn :-P

http://www.venganza.org

I would suggest to you that the very reason many children have problems with written math problems IS because they simply have no reading comprehension. The reason some guys are missing fingers, arms, and eyes, is because the didn't read the instruction manuals and didn't see any logic between good health and following instructions. As for science, there is nothing wrong with science. There is something very wrong with allowing only secular reasoning and rationalizations to manipulate and mold the minds of students. I see nothing unreasonable with imagining that dinosaurs had colorful feathers; however, the truth is that no one has been able to detect color in fossils. Few dinosaurs have been found to be anything other than fossilized bones. Yet when some T-REX DNA was discovered, secular scientists went from being scientific to being fanatical secularists. They imagined all sort of impossibilities to hang onto their 100 plus million year stance. This was all done at the injury of providing an opportunity for students to rationally think. I'm sorry that you believe that scientifically observable intelligent design, has no place in a science class. I'm sorry that you feel my faith amounts to believing in spaghetti monsters. Perhaps you are only demonstrating exactly what removing any consideration of GOD will reduced reasoning to by the publicly educated. I might also suggest that you watch Saturday children's shows today with a critical mind. I believe that you will find far more mindless spaghetti monsters then you would have in 1960.

 

[LittleNipper]

Bravo. :D

For what? What has been gained? What has been proven? Public education is about as thoughtful as a dead horse, because of narrow-minded misconceptions about a document written over 200 years ago by thoughtful individuals. I imagine that they believed that Americans would become more thoughtful and philosophical instead of mere billboards for tatoo artists, think spending exorbitant prices for cotton jeans, t-shirts, and goofy hats simply because it is URBAN WEAR; spending a fortune for canvas shoes because some idol wears them, and can run off at the mouth a mile a minute but have little understanding of what it all means. If that is something to be proud of-----------------------BRAVO--------------------that is what we've become....

 

[LittleNipper]

No one is suggesting that anyone can force anyone to believe anything.

You can't even force children to listen to religious programming in public schools.

[quote:4031d]The reality is that reading the Bible openly, does not make people either Christian or religious in and of itself. I do feel that Bible reading in Public Institutions is challenging, thought provoking, and intellectually stimulating.

And illegal in science classes. You are writing a justification for teaching our children witchcraft. You might not think so, but if you can inject your religious beliefs, anyone else can inject theirs.[/quote:4031d]

Your logic justifies why so many kids today turn to witchcraft. Who would have imagined in 1782, 1890, 1955, that in 2006 there would be so many kids involved with witchcraft, demon worship, and gothic horrors, once only found on some backward island or in a pagan jungle community far removed from either a public library or a corner church. Others are STILL injecting their religious beliefs regardless of what becomes of Christian influences----------------or havn't you noticed just how many public school students behave today.

 

[moniker]

Bravo. :D

For what? What has been gained? What has been proven? Public education is about as thoughtful as a dead horse, because of narrow-minded misconceptions about a document written over 200 years ago by thoughtful individuals. I imagine that they believed that Americans would become more thoughtful and philosophical...

If you chose to not take a philosophy class in highschool how is it the system's fault? As well I'm curious as to how secular schools (which have enough to teach as is) prevent religious studies from ever occurring.

Oh and one of the basic tenets of ID is that an undetectable force is guiding the processes of natural selection in a certain and specific way to produce the results you can currently see today. How is that scientific and not theological?

 

[dad]

And illegal in science classes. You are writing a justification for teaching our children witchcraft. You might not think so, but if you can inject your religious beliefs, anyone else can inject theirs.

The majority decide on any injecting, that is the point. In Saudi Arabia, it would not be witchcraft, but muslim teachings. In a country with a Christian majority, it should reflect that. Period. If the old documents truly said and meant what you claim, (I don't think they do) then they ought to be put in the garbage, and new ones come up with that reflect the majority! And tough on those that don't like it. Move to Atheiattica or some place.

 

[moniker]

So you basically just want to live in a theocracy, the kind of country our forefathers fled due to religious persecution, and tough to the people who think differently.

 

[LittleNipper]

Bravo. :D

For what? What has been gained? What has been proven? Public education is about as thoughtful as a dead horse, because of narrow-minded misconceptions about a document written over 200 years ago by thoughtful individuals. I imagine that they believed that Americans would become more thoughtful and philosophical...

If you chose to not take a philosophy class in high school how is it the system's fault? As well I'm curious as to how secular schools (which have enough to teach as is) prevent religious studies from ever occurring.

Oh and one of the basic tenets of ID is that an undetectable force is guiding the processes of natural selection in a certain and specific way to produce the results you can currently see today. How is that scientific and not theological?

Every act has an equal and opposite reaction-----Newton's Law hardly sounds any less then a characteristic of an undetectable force. There are no philosophy classes in public grade schools, though this was hardly always the case. Latin, geography, and classic literature were once all requirements for high school students graduation, if college was even considered a goal-----prior to late 1950's. And then they began to say that Latin was a dead language, and now little Johnny can't read even comic books very well-----let alone think coherently without music, cell phones or TV blasting....

 

[LittleNipper]

So you basically just want to live in a theocracy, the kind of country our forefathers fled due to religious persecution, and tough to the people who think differently.

No, what people fled was not from GOD, but government sponsored RELIGION. The beliefs were supposed to be in the hands of the people without governmental control of religion, education, and want was socially acceptable. The people were to form communities that were not to be sponsored or directed by the federal government. This all has changed, as the Federal government has become a force to reckon with and not just a means to unite the states against outside invasion or a mediating force between state disagreements. The Federal government was never to be a god and yet there are some who believe the Government is god and the Constitution is its Bible and the Supreme Court is the priesthood. The Founding Fathers never meant for religious people to become secular either to hold office or teach school. The Founding Fathers did want individuals to remain individuals and to be elected on their character and not for some imagined secular governmental considerations.

 

[dad]

So you basically just want to live in a theocracy, the kind of country our forefathers fled due to religious persecution, and tough to the people who think differently.

Well, I think Littlenipper nailed it already for you. We live in a land that is antichrist to a large extent. Not just the US, but the world. The people coming here never came to turn their children into little antichrists and homos. They never came here to keep their kids shielded from Jesus, and God, and prayer, and Christmas plays, and fed secular theology by force of law. I really don't know where you got that idea.
You ought to start respecting the majority. Let them have children exposed to prayer, and God. Not a denomination, but a general bible knowledge. That is a part of wisdom, history, and, yes, even ---gasp---science! He set certain laws in place, and we learn how they work. We even can get some idea how they used to work and will work, contrary to the forced baseless indoctrination of the anything but Christ goes types.

 

[moniker]

Bravo. :D

For what? What has been gained? What has been proven? Public education is about as thoughtful as a dead horse, because of narrow-minded misconceptions about a document written over 200 years ago by thoughtful individuals. I imagine that they believed that Americans would become more thoughtful and philosophical...

If you chose to not take a philosophy class in high school how is it the system's fault? As well I'm curious as to how secular schools (which have enough to teach as is) prevent religious studies from ever occurring.

Oh and one of the basic tenets of ID is that an undetectable force is guiding the processes of natural selection in a certain and specific way to produce the results you can currently see today. How is that scientific and not theological?

Every act has an equal and opposite reaction-----Newton's Law hardly sounds any less then a characteristic of an undetectable force.

Are you joking or being serious? You should have learned what Newton's laws mean in your first year of physics. I mean kinematics is the bare bones of physics.

There are no philosophy classes in public grade schools, though this was hardly always the case. Latin, geography, and classic literature were once all requirements for high school students graduation, if college was even considered a goal-----prior to late 1950's. And then they began to say that Latin was a dead language, and now little Johnny can't read even comic books very well-----let alone think coherently without music, cell phones or TV blasting....

And just to note I was talking about High School.

There are philosophy classes in high school, unless you go to an small or underfunded one. The other two subjects you listed are also taught in HS, both as subsets of some core classes as well as subjects in their own right. The rest of your argument is a strawman whose point escapes me, but I'll still try. Literacy rates in the US are at 99% across the board and even if that weren't the case I fail to see how people choosing to ignore their teachings is the fault of the system. Proof that it needs to be improved? Of course, but willfull ignorance it is not inherent to public school. You get as much out of your education as you put into it.

Your next post is also a strawman, and a considerably poor one at that. You actually proved my point at the start, then went into some rant about how the Fed isn't divine and some non-existent sedcular 'requirement' to hold public office; then went back to prove my point, again. Noting how the founders didn't want the government restricting things. Things like personal religion. I dont' even know what Dad's strawman was trying to prove. Seemed like it was along the vein that we should ignore minority rights because the majority wants to and then a blanket secularists just hate christians ender.

 

[LittleNipper]

Bravo. :D

For what? What has been gained? What has been proven? Public education is about as thoughtful as a dead horse, because of narrow-minded misconceptions about a document written over 200 years ago by thoughtful individuals. I imagine that they believed that Americans would become more thoughtful and philosophical...

If you chose to not take a philosophy class in high school how is it the system's fault? As well I'm curious as to how secular schools (which have enough to teach as is) prevent religious studies from ever occurring.

Oh and one of the basic tenets of ID is that an undetectable force is guiding the processes of natural selection in a certain and specific way to produce the results you can currently see today. How is that scientific and not theological?

Every act has an equal and opposite reaction-----Newton's Law hardly sounds any less then a characteristic of an undetectable force.

Are you joking or being serious? You should have learned what Newton's laws mean in your first year of physics. I mean kinematics is the bare bones of physics.

There are no philosophy classes in public grade schools, though this was hardly always the case. Latin, geography, and classic literature were once all requirements for high school students graduation, if college was even considered a goal-----prior to late 1950's. And then they began to say that Latin was a dead language, and now little Johnny can't read even comic books very well-----let alone think coherently without music, cell phones or TV blasting....

And just to note I was talking about High School.

There are philosophy classes in high school, unless you go to an small or underfunded one. The other two subjects you listed are also taught in HS, both as subsets of some core classes as well as subjects in their own right. The rest of your argument is a strawman whose point escapes me, but I'll still try. Literacy rates in the US are at 99% across the board and even if that weren't the case I fail to see how people choosing to ignore their teachings is the fault of the system. Proof that it needs to be improved? Of course, but willfull ignorance it is not inherent to public school. You get as much out of your education as you put into it.

Your next post is also a strawman, and a considerably poor one at that. You actually proved my point at the start, then went into some rant about how the Fed isn't divine and some non-existent sedcular 'requirement' to hold public office; then went back to prove my point, again. Noting how the founders didn't want the government restricting things. Things like personal religion. I dont' even know what Dad's strawman was trying to prove. Seemed like it was along the vein that we should ignore minority rights because the majority wants to and then a blanket secularists just hate christians ender.

So tell me, how does a public school present PHILOSOPHY without reference to GOD, Christianity, the Bible and sharing of verses of scripture to support one's stance? No sir, it does not happen. They ponder Plato and stick to secular values, but real PHILOSOPHY is the bases of dogmatic concerns and values and one cannot skirt around religion without leaving a big round hole in the middle. I didn't prove your point at all. The FACT is, that the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT has no place sponsoring or directing education. Education belongs in the hands of both religious and irreligious organizations that are sponsored and funded by individuals and groups who agree with the topics presented, the way those topic are presented and the mode of teaching.

The reason there is no corporal punishment in public schools, of any kind, is because the GOVERNMENT has stepped in and said it cannot be done. The reason that there is not a voucher system is because the government and the teacher's unions do not wish to lose control of education. The reason there is little mention of any FLOOD research and RATE investigations is because the Supreme Court once gave the false, non unanimous impression, that schools belong to the government and the the government cannot express GOD to impressionable students in any terms. That was taken as a means by ungodly individuals, as a cart blanche to separate the educational system from the communities they serve, in an effort to secularize society, thus eliminating the embarrassment of moral exposure with concerns of a righteous GOD, and instead re-establish morality as the arm of secular socialism from the state, thus creating a SECULAR CHURCH/RELIGION under the control of bureaucracy.

 

[moniker]

So tell me, how does a public school present PHILOSOPHY without reference to GOD, Christianity, the Bible and sharing of verses of scripture to support one's stance? No sir, it does not happen. They ponder Plato and stick to secular values, but real PHILOSOPHY is the bases of dogmatic concerns and values and one cannot skirt around religion without leaving a big round hole in the middle. I didn't prove your point at all. The FACT is, that the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT has no place sponsoring or directing education. Education belongs in the hands of both religious and irreligious organizations that are sponsored and funded by individuals and groups who agree with the topics presented, the way those topic are presented and the mode of teaching.

If you want to redefine everything so that it requires the christian god of the bible in order to fit your perception of the subject, then yes you are correct public schools likely don't teach that. If, however, you want to use the actual definition let me know.

The federal government doesn't prevent private schools from existing and teaching kids, however, for people who cannot afford such an institution it provides public schooling for the collective benefit for our society. As that is a public institute and afforded by state and federal funds it is required to follow the same rules as any other governmental institution. It does have a place in their affairs.

Oh and the point you proved for me was in regards to religious persecution. I realize it may be difficult to keep track of things like that in your tangents.

 

[Barbarian]

The majority is free to say no to old age opinion and belief being forced on them!

In the case of science, only science is permitted. You're quite free to discuss the Bible in a religion class. However, science is the consensus of scientific findings and cannot be modified by religious belief. If you don't like that, you really need to find a country more in tune with your ideas.

Also, the bill of rights seems like it was not meant to stop children from learning about God, or saying the Lord's prayer in school./quote]

That's already settled. You can't impose a prayer on kids in a public school. That's the Constitution.

[quote:faf73] They did that for many years after the bill, just fine.

They also bought and sold human beings, and beat confessions out of unpopular people. That we violated the law in the past is not license to keep doing it.

What it is is a hijacking of the intents of older laws to fit an Anti Christ anti God agenda!

Don't bother with that drivel. You don't even believe it. You're upset because you can't impose your religious beliefs on other people.

Barbarian observes:
As you learned earlier, we can tell about things like the speed of light from the eyes of fossil arthropods. And that's just one of innumerable ways we can do that.

This is a very far from the truth.

It's precisely the truth.

[quiote] I learned you make silly hit and run statements, with big empty claims.[/quote:faf73]

If you think about it for even a little, you'll see that it's obvious. Lenses refract light, because light changes speed and direction as it moves from one medium to another. The curvature of the lens determines the amount of refraction. Turns out the lenses on trilobite eyes are tuned to light at the present speed. So we know it was the same then.

Barbarian observes:
You'll have to find another country, if you want that. The founders deliberately made it impossible for the majority to take the rights of others.

Teaching about God, and simple prayer is not taking anyone's rights, it is a majority right.

That's already settled too. Minority rights are not subject to the will of the majority. Don't like it? Find another place to live.

It's about time the minorities, (most of whom would not mind at all, so don't say you speak for them)pay attention to the rights of parents to train up a child in the way he should go.

If they can't do it at home and in churches, the government is prohibited to do it for you.

Barbarian observes:
Incidentally, almost all polls show that YE creationism is a minority viewpoint. And over the years, it's become more so.

[quiote]In the US, most people believe there was a flood, I think, from one recent poll I read. Most people believe in God as well.[/quote]

And only a minority agree with creationism.

http://pewforum.org/surveys/origins/

Be careful what you wish for.

No one says we need to indoctrinate kids in flood geology here. But neither should they be terrorized by being taught there is no God, or hope, or afterlife, or creation, etc!

Which school district does that? You made it up, didn't you?

We don't need lectures on some baseless dream past that cannot be evidenced that sees some dark Godless origin.

As you know, there is much evidence for the evolution of living things, including directly observed speciation. And, of course, you just made up the part that schools teach there is no God.

Give the kids real science that deals with the known present.

Not much wishing involved, the knowledge of the Lord will fill the earth, as waters cover the seas. No man anywhere will say 'know the Lord' then, cause all will know Him.

The only difference is, I accept the way He did creation, and you won't.

You old agers who preach suns that will burn out, and no spiritual, afterlife, God, or eternity ought to be careful what you wish for.

Wouldn't be a dad post without a false accusation, would it?

Mt 18:6 - But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

definition of OFFEND

"to put a stumbling block or impediment in the way, upon which another may trip and fall, metaph. to offend
to entice to sin
to cause a person to begin to distrust and desert one whom he ought to trust and obey
to cause to fall away "

http://www.studylight.org/isb/view.cgi?number=4624

That's what YE does. I've seen a lot of people whose faith was damaged when man's doctrine of YE was taught to them as God's truth. Some of them lost their faith when they realized it was a lie.

YE will have much to answer for.

 

[Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
You are writing a justification for teaching our children witchcraft. You might not think so, but if you can inject your religious beliefs, anyone else can inject theirs.

Your logic justifies why so many kids today turn to witchcraft.

Nope. In fact, it wouldn't permit it in public school. If you want your religion to be part of the curriculum, you have agreed to let witchcraft in, too.

Who would have imagined in 1782, 1890, 1955, that in 2006 there would be so many kids involved with witchcraft, demon worship, and gothic horrors, once only found on some backward island or in a pagan jungle community far removed from either a public library or a corner church. Others are STILL injecting their religious beliefs regardless of what becomes of Christian influences----------------or havn't you noticed just how many public school students behave today.

I have. The vast majority of them claim to be Christian. And they are generally pretty good kids. They aren't as mean as we were; they don't pick on kids for being different as much.

They don't work as hard, and they aren't as physically fit as we were. BTW, kids get to wear religious articles and t-shirts in school, thanks to Clinton's exectutive order requiring the Justice Department to intervene in cases where things like Bibles or crosses were banned. If schools ban such things now, it's not just the ACLU on their case, it's the federal government. (Bush has see fit to reconfirm that order)

 

[dad]

In the case of science, only science is permitted. You're quite free to discuss the Bible in a religion class. However, science is the consensus of scientific findings and cannot be modified by religious belief. If you don't like that, you really need to find a country more in tune with your ideas.

Science is limited to the present, and has been wrongly thought to be all encompassing. It isn't. Only beliefs go beyond the present, and the majority beliefs need to be the ones that do that. No hiding behind the cloak of science there any more.


[quote:60580]That's already settled. You can't impose a prayer on kids in a public school. That's the Constitution.

That is doing violence to the original meaning, and the ruling is wrong. If the true meaning of the constitution is lost, it is worthless, and needs tossing in the rubbish, Simple. The majorit cannot be oppressed with vile interpretations of it. Time to flush.

They also bought and sold human beings, and beat confessions out of unpopular people. That we violated the law in the past is not license to keep doing it.

Look at Gitmo! Abu grave, etc. Look at those that try to flee the military and it's wars. Don't think you can hold up a candle to many of the early Christian pioneers here. 6% of kids in public school on ritilin, or somme such I read in one survey a few years ago! Mostly boys. Filthy curricli, with all sorts of unbiblical things in it. No prayer, no God, no real right and wrong. A veritable cesspool. You must be kidding.

Don't bother with that drivel. You don't even believe it. You're upset because you can't impose your religious beliefs on other people.

Evil beliefs are being forced on Children now. Drivel that opposes any Godly majority.

As you learned earlier, we can tell about things like the speed of light from the eyes of fossil arthropods. And that's just one of innumerable ways we can do that.

You make claims, but don't put anything bit claims on the table. Show us one trilobite that couls only use present light! You are dreaming.

If you think about it for even a little, you'll see that it's obvious. Lenses refract light, because light changes speed and direction as it moves from one medium to another. The curvature of the lens determines the amount of refraction. Turns out the lenses on trilobite eyes are tuned to light at the present speed. So we know it was the same then.

Really, now? Can you prove it? Where is the trilobite? I call you on this one!!!! I am ready for a good laugh.

That's already settled too. Minority rights are not subject to the will of the majority. Don't like it? Find another place to live.

Minority so called rights do not include the right to be antichrist, or have such an agenda. What is taught to children as touching beliefs must be subject to the will of the majority. Don't like it? Head for the hills.

If they can't do it at home and in churches, the government is prohibited to do it for you.

Then they have no rights to take our money, or represent a majority, or teach kids anything at all. Teaching a child about the savior, and creator is a sacred duty.

And only a minority agree with creationism.

But I read that a majority believe the bible and the flood.

Which school district does that? You made it up, didn't you?

All do. Because teaching we are beasts, and our universe came from a tiny speck, and life was not really created, but came from some pond slime, etc is what I said.

As you know, there is much evidence for the evolution of living things, including directly observed speciation. And, of course, you just made up the part that schools teach there is no God.

Of course you are either delusional, or not telling the truth there. Teaching that creation was something other than God created is anti bible. As for the ability of creation to adapt, and evolve, that has nothing to do with God not creating it. It is simply a created trait.

The only difference is, I accept the way He did creation, and you won't.

No, you accept that He is a liar, and either dead or incompetant. That the creation in the bible in six days is a fable. That is not accepting the way He did it. as you claim. On the contrary, it is rejecting it totally.

Wouldn't be a dad post without a false accusation, would it?

Science teaches the sun will burn out. Ask almost anyone. The false accusation, therefore rests solely with you.

That's what YE does. I've seen a lot of people whose faith was damaged when man's doctrine of YE was taught to them as God's truth. Some of them lost their faith when they realized it was a lie.

[/quote:60580]
Like you lost your faith in God's word, that it was a lie, or didn't mean what it said? It does. The doctrine that the past was the same, which disallows a true bible is the lie. Those who 'lost faith' because some creation science people had some things wrong really don't have much excuse. They were simply trying to explain things as best they could leaving God true. As it turns out they were right, God was right all along.

 

[MrVersatile48]

Hundreds of top scientists, from micro-biology to astronomy, see so much evidence of detailed design that they recognise the handiwork of the Most Brilliant Brain in the Universe: the Almighty Creator, making sure that every kind of life was ideal for its location & purpose

See many learned articles, books, CDs, DVDs etc @ http://www.discovery.org/csc

http://www.discovery.org/csc/essentialReadings.php

See also http://www.creationevidence.org - as I said on BBC Radio Merseyside 2/3 weeks ago - http://www.bbc.co.uk/liverpool & http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio2 have lunchtime phone-ins, Mon-Fri & both acdept emails

Academia prides itself on freedom of thought, so the censorship of all criticism of Darwin drivel is most sinister - as is the forbidding of Intelligent Design discussion in schools, colleges & universities - so campaign for freedom now - email MPs @ http://www.parliament.uk

Ian

& again, no evo-loopy contradicted my creation preaching @ the zoo, the station or the bus stop

Ian

 

[MrVersatile48]

See viewtopic.php?f=19&t=19324&p=344734#p344734

& the 3 posts that follow

Enjoy the weekend!

Ian

 

[Barbarian]

What gripes the creationists is precisely that science is a democracy. Scientists don't have an official theory decider. They just form a consensus on what is right, based on the evidence.

They guys who want to hijack our schools don't want democracy; they want to lie to students what scientists have learned. That's why,every time they've tried to do it, the courts have slapped them down.

And so has the public. The teaching of creationism disguised as science wasn't stopped in Dover public schools by the court. It was stopped by the parents, who when they discovered what these frootloops were up to, voted them out of office.

The majority of Americans believe that organisms evolve, with most of them accepting that God had a role in it.