Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I suppose if you pick number 2 people are teaching Atheism? There is nothing to teach in atheism, there is no atheist book or teachings, calling something atheistic (if that is what you are calling number 2) is silly because atheists don't stand for anything in particular. Christianity is very specific and particular in what it teaches though. If you start teaching about a supernatural entity many questions will be asked and because the students are in a science class (learning about the big bang) it will not be appropriate for the teacher to answer such questions. So little jimmy goes home and asks his parents about it. If the parents don't believe in this kind of thing they will be pissed that schools are teaching children fairy tales (in their mind) and fights will start. Leave religion out of schools because we are teaching science in science classes NOT mythology. Science is based in facts and theories. Mythology doesn't have to have a logical base. School is there to get children ready for the real world. Parents are there to teach them their personal family morals, and religion. Not the other way around.
The one thing all Atheists have in common is they deny any C/creator exists or caused the material universe to come into existence.
Is it proven "science" that no outside power caused the Big Bang?
Did all that exists in the material universe spontaneously come into being at one point in time and in perfect order just because?
See, you can't side step the question without deliberately declaring no C/creator exists.
In doing that, the state takes an official position on religion.
Yes, I am aware that some were Deists. But many were Christian and our country was definitely founded on Judea-Christian principles/values/beliefs. What I see happening in the public school today is a definite push toward teaching other cultural belief systems and no mention of Christianity. In fact, in my dd's 5th grade class this past year, there was a definite anti-Christianity slant to things. I do not think this is right. I am not saying that Creationism should be taught as fact in the public schools. But, I see nothing wrong and a lot right with teaching respectfully "about" it as a belief system that many people hold either exclusively or via faith congruently with evolution.
What's wrong with it from the statist's point of view is that it answers a question they cannot.
Where did all this come from?
Since we know from the discovery of the Big Bang (red shift) the Universe definitely did have a starting point in which all that is observable began.
Next question...WHY did that happen?
Statist's answer..."we don't need to rely on superstition to explain what we don't yet know".
I would rather present all possible answers and let people arrive at their own conclusions.
Couple of questions:
1- What would you like to see being taught as a part of the curriculum?
2- Do you believe in evolution? Explain.
1. It's a theory. Same as anything else.
2. No. I don't believe in evolution, there are a lot of holes in the theory. But, of course, that's not all that relevant, since evolution does not address the topic of creation itself. Yes, it is something to discuss when speaking of man's origins...but as for the origins of the universe, it's not really the main point.
2. No. I don't believe in evolution, there are a lot of holes in the theory. But, of course, that's not all that relevant, since evolution does not address the topic of creation itself. Yes, it is something to discuss when speaking of man's origins...but as for the origins of the universe, it's not really the main point.
1. Elaborate. What would you like to see covered in creationism?
2. Clearly, you don't like the way science works. These holes you speak about weren't pulled out of thin air. They, themselves, are based on the very theories you don't believe in.
You're correct about the fact that evolution does not bother with creation. At least it explains how life in general, and humans have evolved and continue to. Creationism doesn't even make an attempt to do that, because it has no leg to stand on, in that regard. If you don't believe in evolution, let me ask, a fundamental question... why are some humans darker skinned than others? How does creationism explain that?
1. Elaborate. What would you like to see covered in creationism?
Our schools spend a decent amount of time stating that the Big Bang started it all, and explaining how the universe formed after that. As an alternative, I'd be happy with spending a few minutes just laying out a few alternative ideas. Something as simple as a statement that many consider the theory of an intelligent designer that created the universe, as evident in the natural order of the universe and apparent design in nature and creation would be sufficient in my mind.
I'm not suggesting we teach the Christian, Buddhist, or any other specific religious view of things.
Quote:
2. Clearly, you don't like the way science works. These holes you speak about weren't pulled out of thin air. They, themselves, are based on the very theories you don't believe in.
Such as? What assumptions are you making about me?
I'm pointing at things like massive gaping holes in the fossil record.
Quote:
You're correct about the fact that evolution does not bother with creation. At least it explains how life in general, and humans have evolved and continue to.
Except that evolution is not an observable science. It's based off of some empirical data that may easily be interpreted much differently.
Quote:
Creationism doesn't even make an attempt to do that, because it has no leg to stand on, in that regard.
Creationism is the topic of how things were created. Not necessarily how nature works today. I'm not opposed to science, it's just that evolution is not good science.
Quote:
If you don't believe in evolution, let me ask, a fundamental question... why are some humans darker skinned than others? How does creationism explain that?
Natural selection means that those that were better able to withstand certain climates thrived in those climates. That's not evolution. The black man is not fundamentally different than the white man--they just adapted to fit their climate, is all. They are the same species.
So let me get this straight: are you suggesting that every species that has ever existed still exists? Is that really your argument?
No, man has eliminated some species from existence. The Ice Age eliminated a lot of species from existence.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
