Here's a place to rant and rave about whatever you feel like.
Sunshine brought up that it's back to school for her kids.
Question: John McCain thinks it should be up to individual school districts to decide whether to teach Creationism in their science class.
Do any of you agree with that?
FRIDAY 'ROUND-THE-HORN: YOU-PROBLEM EDITION.
-
*Went down a K hole the other night.*
I have said more than once that the *New York Post* is Rupert Murdoch’s
primary stateside lie-diffuser – more than ...
1 week ago
11 Comments:
i would think they can teach it so long as they teach all the other theories. one theory should not be suggested over any other.
speaking of, does anyone know what happened with the particle collider on Monday? i havent read anything about it.
rant: i jacked my head and neck all up at practice last night. fell right on my butt and the head went back and SMACK right on the floor. too bad my heads not cushioned with fat like my butt is:)
creationism is not a scientific theory S. City. When you're in science class you're supposed to learn science-not religion.
I haven't heard anything about the particle collider.
Well, whatever, you know i am an athiest so I dont believe in any of that sillyness but I dont see the harm in saying "this is what science is but some people believe jesus is magic"
(yes thats a nod to sarah silverman:)
and its not like its going to harm them- as sex ed in texas does.
Well I worry that it could harm them. If Creationism is offered as a valid scientific theory that has the weight of the rest of the scientific theories ie it's been tested using observated phenomenon-I think that could confuse the kids into thinking that belief is the same thing as science.
If it was offered in this way: "Gee kids, it's time to learn about the origin of us and every living thing around us. One "theory" was dreamt up by goat herders in Israel 5,000 years ago. The other actual scientific theory that has been tested and observed is evolution."
Somehow though I don't think that kind of presentation is what creationists have in mind.
And don't even get me started on the crock of BS that abstinence only sex education is...
well nothings been proven either way in actuality and the jesus proponents claim god created science and doubt in the first place, anyway. i guess i just dont care, really.
i do care about the sex ed in texas tho. abstinence is all they teach. and did you know you cant even sell dildos and vibes in texas unless they are marked as "novelty" devices?
Evolution has been proved S. City. Scientists can see it labs...we have the transitional fossils...mountains and mountains of evidence. It's how organisms change.
Creationism-the belief in a young earth created by God according to the old Testament-is literally impossible.
Teaching creationism in science class would be like teaching finger painting in math class. It just don't mix.
And about Texas abstinence-did you see the film "the education of Shelby Knox"?
I absolutely do NOT think any sort of creationism should be taught in school! There is enough for a child to consume in a 7 hour day that is needed for them to use in the world, that they do not need to be distracted (more like brainwashed) with where they will go when they die. If parents are so "for" religion in school, they can send them to a private one. If they can't afford it, then they need more than god to get them through life. I guess this is my "democrat" side of thinking. Besides, why teach something that has a 50/50 chance of being bullsh!t?
I was curious about where you were at on this Sunshine.
Thanks for chiming in.
good point on the private school option, sunshine.
and you are right bold- creationism shouldnt be taught in science class since it is not science. i wasnt paying attention to you objecting to the class it was taught in. youre right, it has no place in Science class.
i do think it should be taught in social studies, tho, along with all the other religions and theories so kids dont feel like their school is hiding something from them (therby glamorizing it)
do they still have social studies in school????
S. City, you have a good idea that religion should be taught in social studies and not science. The problem with it, though, is that history is based on facts of what happened in the past…and there isn’t one shed of evidence (other than the fictional bible) that god created Adam and Eve, or…Mary was in fact a virgin and god impregnated her. Another thing, if you are going to have religion as a part of history, then you would have to have ALL religions as a whole, which would include Mythology and Paganism, as most Christian holidays and celebrations derived from those mentioned.
So, in a nutshell, there isn’t anything to gain from teaching our children about religion in the classroom-even social studies. Besides the biggest part of history and learning about it is the fact that “history repeats itself”…and I don’t think there is a virgin in our future that god is going to impregnate so we can all be forgiven. Just writing those words sound ridiculous-the whole religion does. If that were the case, every girl from 15 to 40 that didn’t want anyone to know she was knocked up could use this method. Hee-hee-hee!
To answer your question, S. City, yes…Social Studies is still taught in school. I think most of Elementary School it is considered Social Studies.
So, Mr. Bold, now you know where I stand, and I assume you know how passionate I feel about it. You may not want to get me started again. I see where you stand on Creationism versus science in the school, but how do you feel about religion as a whole? And you should have known I'm the first to chime in, LOL!
Actually I think religious myths out to be taught in English class. It's basically poetry after all. And most of Genesis was shepherd's song originally.
As far as religion wise goes Sunshine...I wouldn't call myself a true believer but Catholic is my gang. Which is why I'm anti Fundie...those people just don't know how to read the Book.
Post a Comment