Stealth creationism in Louisiana schools. (lawyers, activist, death, state)

[albion]

I've read that a bill has been passed in Louisiana that sanctions the teaching of creationism in science classes, do you agree with that?

[Tin Knocker]

I dont see a problem, if thats what they want. I'd be against it if I lived there,,, but I dont.

[rifleman]

The OP IS pretty much being asked from an assumed perspective of "if you lived there". If that were so, I'd be pretty much in their faces, (I and a few good, logical lawyers) especially given 2 key elements in my argument:

1) It's potentially a force-fed religious component in a otherwise religion-free but required course (a mandatory biology course requirement required to achieve a science major ). I recall there's something quite clearly stated in our Constitution about not forcing religious dogma on anyone... and;

2) The recent proof of Evolution (Lenski et al, 2008), and the absolute lack of any proof for Creation. Hopes, yes. Wishes, yes. Dreams, yes. Faith, yes.

Facts, not so much.

Matter of fact, the odds are so stacked "ag'in it" that it should, more appropriately, be taught (with no problems from me or any other non-Christian parent) in a religious philosopy class, under the sub-heading "curiosities".

Oddly, a few years back, an open-minded school administrator, trying to find some common ground, wanted to set up two different biology class curricula in his school. One with the opposing view of Creationism included, and one with only Evolution. The frothy-mouthed dogmo-thiests would have no part of it, pounding the table and stomping their little feet, tears in their oh-so-rational eyes... demanding "Death to Evolution", while yelling something about burning science texts in the public square.... Nice.

To systematically and vigorously deny the existance of an obvious, apparent and proven scientific fact (right along with photo-synthesis and radio-waves [prove THEY exist! I can't see them. It's just god gathering up messages and tossing them through the air!], and replace it with some mythical allegories and calling THAT science, just to satiate the blood-lust of a completely unqualified and scientifically illiterate audience (as in: the local Church activists), smells quite distinctly of, well something quite "rotten"...

The final blow to the advancement of knowledge in that city and state is that, like the Salem Witch Hunters' gleeful smiles as another innocent went up in smoke in the public square, these "types", these PTA Churchy acolytes, have a smug "imperialist" smirk on their faces, having stopped the progression of open-minded curiosity let again.

Not for long.

[NVplumber]

From a strictly HISTORICAL perspective, creationism could be discussed, but to teach it from a scientific stance ( as a fact) goes down a dangerous road. The study of various religions as an influence in world history is almost prerequisite, so long as these same religions are not being professed to be "the way".

[GloryB]

It should be discussed along with all the other theories.

[MrsMtnsOnTheMind]

If the theory of evolution is allowed then the theory of Creationism should be as well. All theories should be examined and left up to the reader to decide.

[Tin Knocker]

I was thinking historically. Hard to believe a group of adults would vote to NOT teach evolution. Is it even a theory anymore? I dont feel it is. We might not entirely understand it but things evolve almost before our eyes.

[MrsMtnsOnTheMind]

This is what I think about evolution.

[Tin Knocker]

Originally Posted by MrsMtnsOnTheMind

This is what I think about evolution.

Which lies been being told longer?

[SuSuSushi]

Originally Posted by GloryB

It should be discussed along with all the other theories.

Creationism is NOT a theory. Please understand what it means to call something a theory.