Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Louisiana public schools teaching Christianity and belittling other religions


  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#16 MadHatter

MadHatter

    The Only Voice of Reason

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,190 posts
  • LocationDark Side of the Moon

Posted 24 January 2014 - 09:04 AM

Needed to come to this thread to remind me just how many people there are walking around out there that are just plain fuging stupid.

 

Thanks CWG for reminding me just how lame many of you are.



#17 thatlookseasy

thatlookseasy

    Death to pennies

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,950 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 09:05 AM

quit trying to work this ridiculous angle that people worship science or that it needs to be "bowed down to".  they're not analogous and it's clear you're trying to make it seem like the same arguments can tear both down.

 

statements like this are particularly hilarious when you consider that almost everyone who drives a car, takes medicine, or really participates in modern society at all blindly trusts science in countless ways.  maybe someone living off the grid eating a can of beans in the woods doesn't (or doesn't nearly as much) but i doubt that's what you're doing right now.

 

did you worry about planes falling out of the sky and crushing you while you drove to work or a gas pipeline exploding and burning you alive today?  lol keep bowing down am i right

 

let's make this simple: is there a better way to understand the world around us than scientific inquiry?  does any one religion provide a better way to treat diseases, solve massive engineering problems, feed the planet, or invent new energy sources?  i'd gladly follow that religion.

 

Well hopefully that man's can of beans was properly sealed, wouldnt want him to contract Botulism.  Or, as stirs might call it, "evil spirits" cause he doesnt bow down to things like "science"



#18 Cat

Cat

    Terminally bored

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,861 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 09:39 AM

So now we are bashing science. Lol

Why dont u go toss all those meds u are on if u dont like science especially science in the last 30 years.

That being said evolutionary theory isn't only 30 years old. And its not just an obscure claim by a scientist.



Sent from my SCH-I535 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app



#19 Zod

Zod

    YOUR RULER

  • MFCEO
  • 20,086 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 09:48 AM

Point was, the "science" that you bow down to cannot get things right within 30 years, but you still bow down to it for their "30 million years ago" scenarios.

 

Spoken like someone who truly does not understand what science is about.

 

 

Bravo!



#20 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • ALL-PRO
  • 23,557 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 09:49 AM

Is bowing down to Zod better or worse then bowing down to science?



#21 Zod

Zod

    YOUR RULER

  • MFCEO
  • 20,086 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 09:50 AM

A scientist will go to the mountains and point out the different layers of rock and slate and show you how over millions of years these things came to pass through the natural processes of the earth, verifying it by watching volcanoes and earthquakes that do similar things.

 

A religious person will tell you god made it that way 7000 years ago.

 

 

 

Thats all you really need to know



#22 Zod

Zod

    YOUR RULER

  • MFCEO
  • 20,086 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 09:51 AM

Is bowing down to Zod better or worse then bowing down to science?

 

the former is more likely to get you laid. Maybe by me.



#23 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • ALL-PRO
  • 23,557 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 09:56 AM

hmm this is making me question everything



#24 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Administrators
  • 13,610 posts
  • LocationILM

Posted 24 January 2014 - 10:15 AM

I'm not for mandatory prayer in school solely on the basis of separation of church and state. Pretty cut and dry there.

 

 

 

As for teaching theories of evolution and creationism. 

 

Creationism should be touched on as a theory.  Not in the concept of "God said this, but science says other wise" but more in the vein of This was a theory.

 

Evolution/Darwinism is by far the most widely accepted theory and what science class should put its focus on.

 

Religion by and large should be left out of science class. 



#25 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • ALL-PRO
  • 23,557 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 10:56 AM

Its not a theory. Stop that.

 

It's - maybe - history.

 

As in,

 

Egyptians thought that building pyramids and mummifying their leaders would help them have a great afterlife, also, Christians thought that people came from dirt or someone elses rib.



#26 Zod

Zod

    YOUR RULER

  • MFCEO
  • 20,086 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 11:20 AM

It is a belief, not a theory.

 

A theory has to be based on some sort of physical evidence and observation if its in science class.

 

Creationism has none of the above.



#27 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,662 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 12:25 PM

Darwin was agnostic...not an atheist.  Just FYI. 

 

If you understand why he was, you'd understand why he went to his death pondering the various ways we came to be.  That being said...there should not be a religous debate within classes regarding WHICH intelligent design/creationism hypothesis it might be.  Focus on why it is up for debate.  Evolution/natural selection is completely recognized in nature and present that theory for how man came to be.  Take this opportunity to explain what hypothesis, scientific hypothesis, and theories are....



#28 Anybodyhome

Anybodyhome

    USN Retired

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,910 posts
  • LocationWherever I May Roam

Posted 24 January 2014 - 12:46 PM

Not in elementary school. There should be no religion of any shape, measure or form in elementary school. I simply do not believe this is a subject that can be taught at an elementary school level by an elementary school teacher without personal beliefs and biases having an effect on the "teachable and testable" material.

 

Science classes in the elementary schools should remain just that- elementary. And I'm talking basic chemistry, biology and anatomy.

 

If we're going to maintain some level of "equal time" between all the theories and hypotheses in religion and science, then I think they could be taught at the high school level into college- all as separate classes. Not sure I want the guy with an undergrad degree in theology from Liberty University teaching Darwinism anymore than I want a person with a naturalist degree in evolutionary beginnings to teach Mormonism.



#29 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,609 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 01:16 PM

Science also told us there would be no polar ice caps by 2013

 

That's not true.

 

Some scientists may have told you that (I don't even think this is the case - there may have been some "Worst case" models, but the majority said nothing about that happening so soon - ps ice cap volume is CRASHING, it's SEA ICE where ice *area* isn't doing terrible everywhere), but "there would be no polar ice caps" is not equivalent to "evolution by natural selection explains the diversity of life today." You're talking about a major difference in scope, here, and context.  If you have issues with evolution, have issues with evolution, and state them.  Don't hide behind weak arguments against climate science, you are better than that.  Even if climate science was to be completely turned on it's head this would say nothing about evolution.

 

edit: This would be the equivalent of pointing to Christian doomsday prophecies that show up every once in a while as evidence that some other religion was a crock of poo because those doomsday prophecies *Didn't* come to pass.

 

 

Point was, the "science" that you bow down to cannot get things right within 30 years, but you still bow down to it for their "30 million years ago" scenarios.

 

Not against parts of evolution at all, but also take things with a grain, sometimes a block of salt.

 
Ok, present an alternative hypothesis with anything even remotely close to the empirical support that evolution has to explain the diversity of life.  Annnd.. go!

 



#30 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,609 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 01:25 PM

Darwin was agnostic...not an atheist.  Just FYI. 

 

If you understand why he was, you'd understand why he went to his death pondering the various ways we came to be.  That being said...there should not be a religous debate within classes regarding WHICH intelligent design/creationism hypothesis it might be.  Focus on why it is up for debate.  Evolution/natural selection is completely recognized in nature and present that theory for how man came to be.  Take this opportunity to explain what hypothesis, scientific hypothesis, and theories are....

 

 

Having now read 3 of the primary intelligent design resources out there, there is NO POINT in trying to "Teach" it in science classrooms.  It really is just philosophy with cherry picking of statistics to discredit evolution without actually presenting a suitable alternative.  There is no way to teach ID at a level beyond "some people think there may have been a supernatural force that started everything," without getting into "God Did It," there really isn't, and I doubt you're going to find someone in this country that is unaware what creationism is. So why bother trying to foster a controversy that isn't really there?

 

There's no reason at all to "teach the controversy," as there really isn't one at the level they argue (this isn't to say evolution has "figured everything out.").  ID proponents are misleading the public and their agendas have been repeatedly exposed for the thinly veiled attempts to push religion back into school - if you don't believe me, do a little research. 

 

I realize you are not proposing teaching a specific "creationism" or "ID" view, but what exactly would you teach?  How do you build a lesson plan around that?  There's hardly anything to say when you aren't being specific at all.

 

Darwin's religious views are irrelevant.  Why even bring them up?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com