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.
That is about as far from accurate as you can get. Fifty years ago, a biology teacher said he was going to start on the evolution chapter. Nobody had to believe anything he said, but it was necessary to learn it. It has nothing to do with a belief or a point of view. It was science class. Creationism is not a science subject, so it was not appropriate for that teacher to handle as a study topic. I never heard a teacher say that religion is false. Religion is not to be mentioned in school.Even in college, religion is taught as a comparison class or a literature class, not a theology class. This is all the truth, but so far, you haven't accepted anything posters in this thread have said to correct your errors.
I tend to believe that what causes a mental block is the wording. What some people label creationism, others simply are making a claim that evolution does have flaws and that other possibilities may exist regarding how things came to be. There are people that simply state there is enough logic and reason that may not suport evolution and that the possibility of an intelligent intervention may exist. Some of these people may not even push for the way the Bible describes how things became to be or even try to push God. Those against this angle often label it creationism as a way to turn people that do not believe in God off in at least considering others view some claim may be good enough to discuss. I have read some literature, lately, on how it MAY be possible that logically some things in the physical world do not make sense to say they became just by chance. I do not believe in the Bible as the word of god so if you or others want to counter that I am pushing for creationism or the Bible will not apply to me. Take care.
and those states don't have the right to do so. creationism and evolution why not teach both.
I'm absolutely terrible at science, and even I know Creationism has no proven scientific base... teach about it in theology or comparative religion courses if you wish, but such things have no place in a science class. So to answer your question "why not teach both?" I'd say because both are not on equal academic grounds. Would you support teaching about Allah in a Spanish class? That makes about the same amount of sense, LOL.
Quote:
just by looking how the universe works do you really think it was evolution, that it just happen by chance?
You should probably start a new thread if you want to discuss this further, but my short answer would be yes, of course... tons of things in nature happen "by chance," and there is scientific evidence to support that concept.
The Constitution allows for the right to freedom of religion and prohibits the establishment of a state religion, however, it does not prevent us from ever having to come in contact with it. You don't get to be insulated from it.
If you want to be secular, that's fine. You have the freedom to not worship as you please. That doesn't mean that a street preacher has to be silenced because you don't want to hear his ramblings (most Christians don't either; street preachers make us all look bad.)
Better yet...laws should not be adjusted to suit the likes and dislikes of any religion.
That is about as far from accurate as you can get. Fifty years ago, a biology teacher said he was going to start on the evolution chapter. Nobody had to believe anything he said, but it was necessary to learn it. It has nothing to do with a belief or a point of view. It was science class. Creationism is not a science subject, so it was not appropriate for that teacher to handle as a study topic. I never heard a teacher say that religion is false. Religion is not to be mentioned in school.Even in college, religion is taught as a comparison class or a literature class, not a theology class. This is all the truth, but so far, you haven't accepted anything posters in this thread have said to correct your errors.
My errors? Are you now the self appointed arbiter of right and wrong? Seriously, get over yourself.
I've made no arguments as to the factual validity of any religious beliefs. I've consistently stated government has no business involving itself in religion regardless whether the focus of that involvement is pushing a religious agenda or attempting to prove a belief system false.
The fact that you and some other posters believe my position is erroneous does not make it wrong. There is a long standing divide between those that embrace evolution and those that embrace creationism. Government funded and administered education cannot promote one belief system as accurate without diminishing the validity of the other.
Sorry a concept so simple as that of government operating within Constitutional restraint and refraining from using it's power and influence as a means of promoting one system of belief over another is difficult for you to comprehend.
Last edited by outbacknv; 03-22-2012 at 01:29 PM..
and those states don't have the right to do so. creationism and evolution why not teach both. i see nothing wrong with that. just by looking how the universe works do you really think it was evolution, that it just happen by chance? both ideas are viable answers why not teach them both and let the individual decide. are liberal so afraid of losing the argument in the public forum, that they rather outlaw the opposition. that would be almost Cuban style government. where people only learn what the government wants them to learn
Creationism is a religious theory, not scientific one.
Are you going to teach creationism from the point of view of every single religion?
The most recent Pew poll finds a majority of those polled think there's too much talk of religion in the current political debate. That it shouldn't be as front and center. It's a private matter, for most.
The most recent Pew poll finds a majority of those polled think there's too much talk of religion in the current political debate. That it shouldn't be as front and center. It's a private matter, for most.
I agree. It's been way too ramped up this election cycle. Santorum takes it to a new (and scary) level.
what religion has harm you? Christianity is voluntary you can't be force to become a christian by thier own teachings.
When you try to interject your religion into government regulations, it DOES affect people of different beliefs... since the OP wants to make this about Obamacare, what if I (a Jew) were under an employee medical plan that was handled by a Catholic-run hospital? Wouldn't you be forcing those beliefs on me by withholding contraceptive coverage? And what if my Jewish children were being forced to pray to the Christian G-d in school, or what if I were gay and barred from marrying based on religious opposition?
Please site specific instances in which religion has been "interjected into government regulations."
Same sex marriage laws, abortion laws, the new birth control changes for catholic businesses...
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.
