Yea! Texas saved from teh stoopid????

[thegreenmeanie]

I am talking about this in scientific means only sir. I am not judging your beliefs. Yes I don't believe in a organized religion God. My point is it doesn't belong in science classes because you can't test faith. There is no way to prove the existence of a God unless he shows up. Therefore it is not something science could possibly at this point even back up and teach in a class. Especially at a public school. Now there are a lot of people who take shots at religion by using science, but in all the text books I have read they have never said Evolution means there is no God. Also Evolution does happen. We don't know everything about it, and I am sure in time Darwin will be proven wrong in some areas, but evolution does happen in species and it has been shown and proven.

Interesting side question, have you two watched "Expelled"? That isn't about creationism but more of Intelligent Design. I watched that and then the Bill Maher one back to back just for fun and contrast.

[firemancheesehead]

Not the whole thing.

A couple of points.

Creationism is repackaged as ID-in fact, at the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial, one of the 'smoking guns' was the "cdesign proponentist"

skepticwiki.org/index.php/Cdesign_proponentsists
The term comes from a textbook, Of Pandas and People, that was the subject of the Dover Panda Trial (Kitzmiller v. Dover). During discovery, it was found that an early draft of the book contained the words "cdesign proponentsists," indicating that the text originally said "creationists" but was later changed to "design proponents." Apparently, an inept editor had failed to select the entire word "creationists" before typing or pasting "design proponents."


The producer of the movie lied to the scientists to get them to appear.

In fact, PZ Myers was tossed out of the movie theater during the screening in Minny.

scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/03/expelled.php

scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2008/03/pz_myers_expelled_gains_sainth.php



So, in an ironic twist of irony, they throw out one enemy, and allow the other enemy in. And you say creotards arnt stoopid!

You ought to checkout the website
www.expelledexposed.com

Sorry, I will always defer to sceince when it comes to what should be taught in school. I will not listed to dentists ( ro anyone else ) who says the Earth is only 6K years old and then ignores all evidence to the contrary.

[mag7ue]

Mar 29, 2009 19:30:35 GMT -5 @thegreenmeanie said:

I am talking about this in scientific means only sir. I am not judging your beliefs. Yes I don't believe in a organized religion God. My point is it doesn't belong in science classes because you can't test faith. There is no way to prove the existence of a God unless he shows up. Therefore it is not something science could possibly at this point even back up and teach in a class. Especially at a public school. Now there are a lot of people who take shots at religion by using science, but in all the text books I have read they have never said Evolution means there is no God. Also Evolution does happen. We don't know everything about it, and I am sure in time Darwin will be proven wrong in some areas, but evolution does happen in species and it has been shown and proven.

Interesting side question, have you two watched "Expelled"? That isn't about creationism but more of Intelligent Design. I watched that and then the Bill Maher one back to back just for fun and contrast.

I'd agree that it shouldn't be taught as fact in a science class in a public school - that's not my argument. But since it is an ALTERNATE VIEWPOINT, it should be presented at the same time as evolution! It's not teaching religion in school, it's teaching that some people don't agree with what the textbook says, and "here's what they believe, just so you have all the information." What the heck is so wrong with that? You two seriously act scared about giving complete and alternating viewpoints. If evolution is so cut and dried FACT, then what are you so worried about?

FMC, as long as you resort to insults and derogatory terms, don't expect me to respect any arguments you have. Again - if what you say is so perfect and correct, you shouldn't need to refer to anyone as "creotards" or anything of the type. It's interesting that so many people that are opposed to creation theories resort to this constantly. Can't refute things any other way?

[thegreenmeanie]

How am I afraid?

I don't care if people are religious, and I don't care if they believe in creationism. A lot of this country does, and I'm not scared at all of it. I wish they would turn to science more, but what can I do to make them? I don't look down on people who believe in a religion the way people who are believers seem to look at me. I have kept this clean, and polite and you are telling me I am scared because of the simple fact that religious beliefs can not be tested by science? It's cool that you are a die hard in what you believe in, I respect that. However you have said nothing in this topic to get me shaking in my boots or even say something I haven't heard 100 times before.

As I asked TW earlier.... Christians are not the only religion in this country. If you want us to teach creationism as an alternative are we going to go into the Easter Religions? What about Mormons? Scientologist? Do you expect these groups to keep their beliefs to their own schools and private homes? If not you have just described a world religions class which my public high school had. The reason these things don't enter a science class is because once again you cannot test or prove faith. Second if you were to talk about creationism for one religion in the class you have to go into all of them, and that is not the point of the class. It's about concrete theories that have been tested and at this point in time stand our best understanding of certain areas of the field. Also a science, and biology text book you buy is not propaganda against religion. I have never seen anything when talking about Darwin or evolution saying "SEE THIS PROVES THERE IS NO GOD" in those books.

[mag7ue]

Mar 29, 2009 23:44:05 GMT -5 @thegreenmeanie said:

How am I afraid?

....

I have kept this clean, and polite and you are telling me I am scared because of the simple fact that religious beliefs can not be tested by science?

No, I'm telling you you're scared because you don't want our kids in school to hear alternate theories.

If the Mormons have another view on how the world came to be, sure, by all means that should be included too. The thing is, we're not talking religion in general here - I'm not advocating that the Christian faith be taught in schools. But almost any religion in the world teaches creation of some type - you can mention creation as an alternate to evolution and not have to change it for every single religion out there.

[thegreenmeanie]

No it is not. What you are referring to is Intelligent Design. Intelligent Design is that the universe and everything is so complex that there had to be something more behind it than chance. Whether that be a God, Aliens, Etc. Creationism is tied to religion itself, it is not just presented as something other than the evolution. Creationism is defined by earth being created by the Christian God.

And... I am not worried. I took world religions, thought it was really cool and interesting. That still doesn't mean it belongs in the science arena. You take that as me being afraid of people believing in something other than evolution. I live in a country that does that right now sir. No, I am not scared of that. I just understand the definitions of science and the strict rules that make it up in order to keep it credible.

[TW]

Okay! The questions about religion have been asked. Should we be teaching religion in schools? How about Buddhism, etc ?

I say "Yes." Why? Because young people need to know that religion plays an important part in decisions made by governments, and often controls entire nations, and their political perspectives.

How can you teach about a nation like Iran, without bringing up the influences of the Muslim faith? How about Israel? And yes, how about the Mormon faith, and their beliefs?

Religion, whether you want to accept it as a reality or not, does formulate most of what's done throughout the world, even within our own nation, but you want to keep this out of the minds of young people because it's not "scientific?" That's a good way to dumb up America even further.

Let's not teach them about Nixon. Let's put a big blank in history where his name appears. We don't want kids to know about his corruption.

Hide Andrew Johnson from the kids. Tell them that the US was in a vacuum after Lincoln was assassinated. We don't want them to know about it....

Most wars are really fought over ideological differences, and the biggest denominator in those differences is religion. Yet, instead of young people understanding what religion is, how people practice it, we would choose to hide it in the closet, as if it was some perversion of science, and wouldn't do for the kids to see.

You wonder why young people today are insensitive to damned near everything, including race, and religion? I think that question can be answered by what we're hearing in this thread alone. Don't let the kids learn about the real world, and what's out there. Put them in a cocoon.

There's only one problem with that. When they start to learn about all of it - after leaving school - they become part of the problem, because they are insensitive to differences in the human condition, and our ways of life.

[thegreenmeanie]

you guys keep taking this a step further than it is. No one has said you can't teach kids about religion. However things like Intelligent Design and Creationism does NOT belong in a science class. There are tons of religious classes, and schools all over this country. You make it sound like we are breaking down doors telling people they can't be religious and have a right to believe what they want. No one is saying that. What we are saying is by the guidelines and rules that make up science and what it is you can not teach a religious or any idea that you can not test or prove. It's not science if you do. Stop over exaggerating what this thread is about. It's about creationism not being able to be taught in a science setting. Your examples of history hold no value in this, because you wouldn't teach those things in a science class either. They have history classes, much like they have world religion classes, bible classes, and finally biology classes.

Second... You just said you were all for separation of church and state. Everything you wrote right there is making it sound like you are down with just coming out and saying America is and was founded as a Christian county. Well it wasn't and yes there are a lot of Christians in this county, but much like with science religion doesn't belong in politics and decisions made for the masses where some of the make up is not part of the religion. I know other countries do that, but that is what separates us, what our framers wanted. Well, it separated us as at one point. Now the Reps are trying to blur the line. How can you just say forget it, "it's time to keep up with the times"?

Children aren't the way they are today because God isn't mentioned in a biology class. There are a lot of factors that go into it and I would wager to say that one is not a large one by any means. You make it sound like people without religion or and idea of it are far behind in morals and intelligence.

For the last time I respect you are religious. I know the good qualities it has, but I also believe it is a personal choice, it is something people either want or don't want, but it does not define whether a person is good or bad. I like the world religions class. I took it for a reason. I know a lot more about the eastern religions now and the Muslim faith. I recommend it to anyone. If for nothing else to help conversations like this, but that still doesn't mean that any of that should be taught in a science setting. I am not for stopping the teaching of it. Like you said religion goes back forever, and has been involved in a lot of big decisions. As a history fan I think it is important it is mentioned in those setting. So once again please stop trying to make it like I am saying religion needs to be thrown out of the academic world. All I am saying is it fits in some places and not others.

[TW]

If I say anything about religion, I have to talk about the origin of it, which is creationism.

You can't teach religion without it. Obviously you should see that. It has to have a source.

It would be like stating that you're going to teach American history, but you're going to forget about everything up until January of 2009, when Obama took office. That's ridiculous.

[thegreenmeanie]

It is nothing like that! You can teach the origin of a religion but it belongs in a religion class, why is that so hard for you to understand? I have seen you talk about science, I know you believe in it and have an understanding of it. What I don't get is how you expect science to bend its rules to allow you to talk about your faith, a thing that science can't prove. That doesn't mean you can't have it or have a class on it, it means you can't have it in a science class

[TW]

So you're advocating courses in religion be taught in public schools?

It's time to read a little more on the subject.

www.conservapedia.com/Theory_of_Evolution

[thegreenmeanie]

Have you read anything I said?

I have stated a couple times not only did we have a World Religions class in our high school, but I had no problem with it. I don't care if people take classes on religion, or want to learn about how life came to be from a religious stand point, even if it's public school. The classes in public schools covers multiple religions therefore not teaching or affiliating itself with one specific religion.

[thegreenmeanie]

Whats next? An Americanthinker articler?

[TW]

Please! Don't insult my intelligence. I haven't insulted yours.

[TMWight]

Mar 30, 2009 15:07:02 GMT -5 TW said:

Please! Don't insult my intelligence. I haven't insulted yours.

I don't think he was. I just think he's frustrated because he's trying to get a point across and you're putting up blinders like he never wrote it (Sorry I didn't mean to insult your intelligence).