there are plenty of people who have an interest in exploiting children in the name of liberalism - for most of the last few hundred years religion has provided a strong counter to that.
Yes the almighty church has done such a bang up job on teaching morality. If it was still up to them they'd be teaching that you get hairy palms from masterbation...and that masterbation will make you gay. Oh, and turn a blind eye to any mention of contraception so we can have them live in fear instead of enlightenment. Cause the 1950's were such a great time to grow up in. (Assuming you were white, straight, male, upper or middle class and protestant). What does "liberalism have to gain by exploting children"? I am really interested in knowing this. (Becuase big business of the Republican Party surely isn't exploiting them.)
Watch what is happening with France as they've gone as far as removal of religious symbols in the school (you can't wear a cross or a burkha)- maybe the next step will be to ban peoples right to be religious in public, next it'll be religion anywhere.
I have heard time and time again from conservatives that schools ought to just teach the three R's. Reading, Rwriting, Rithmatic. (So much for teaching spelling). Don't teach any morality of any kind. So France says Ok, no relgious symbols or teaching whatsoever in school. Now, it's the liberals wanting to persecute God fearing Christians. Ugh! Pick a side and stick to it.
Endless debate over teaching of Creationism in schools resolves issue
by Abaddon 59 Replies latest members adult
-
EvilForce
-
seattleniceguy
EvilForce,
I'm not an expert on pandas by any means, but from what I understood the field of genetics has helped us recently to narrow down the pandas heredity with greater precision than before, and it turns out that they are bears after all. Sorry, I didn't mean to step on your toes there.
SNG
-
FlyingHighNow
This is impossible. As there is no direct evidence for an intelligent designer, such theories are based upon unsubstantiated belief with presuppostitions.
I respectfully disagree. This is your respectful opinion. As for religion being necessary to teach creation, I disagree with that, too. I look at this way: someone or something much more intelligent and powerful than man or woman designed the material universe. I don't know who it is or what it is. I don't believe at all that this someone is some fundy god who hates women, sex for fun or advocates one religion over another.
I believe this world is too complex and amazing to have evolved on its own. I do believe that evolution is a theory or speculation based on observations some people and scientists have made. I was not raised a JW. My father is an oceanographer who believes in evolution. We had lots of books around, including the Time book on it. My parents taught it to us, telling us they believed in evolution, but wisely let us children make up our own minds about it being factual.
When I see a ballet dancer do amazing things with his/her body. When I look at the thousands of things my own hands can do, I see intelligence and forethought there. I think of this designer as a designer and a creator, I do not think of this designer as God or Goddess.
I don't expect anyone to agree with me. That's the wonderful thing about leaving the org. I just feel that to tell children that some people believe the material universe evolved; and that some people think that the universe had an intelligent designer_____and then to allow the children to make up their own minds, shouldn't be objectionable. I do not believe they should be taught that a Bible god or any other God was behind anything. Show them the intelligence in design and let them make up their own minds.
-
EvilForce
I didn't take it as stepping on my toes at all. I learned something new today! I've never said my posts were perfect or even accurate all of the time. But I'm also big enough to realize I don't know everything. Thanks for point that out, I truly do appreciate it.
-
EvilForce
Flying...
I think you have proven most of our points. You were taught evolution by the schools and your father, yet gained an appreciation for intelligent design from Church / KingDumh Hall. Your mind could make the discernment. You did not become some amoral lout from being taught evolution.
Teach scientific theory and fact in science class / Teach supposition, morality, and creationism at church. -
FlyingHighNow
creationism and creationism at church.
I don't view creationism as strictly a religious issue. Yes, teach creationism based on the Bible in Church. But saying in school that there could be an intelligence behind this universe, is not religious.It is only saying there are alternative explanations of how this all got here. By the way, I saw intelligence in the design of things long before I ever graced a KH with my presence. I think the Bible explanation rather simple and vague.
-
Qcmbr
EF which church are you referring to?
anyhow...
'Religion' in general teaches that sex should be within marriage (though that's changed within large numbers of christian churches over the decades) and that there should be respect for the act of creating another life and that their is a spiritual element to the process. I've got kids and certainly I concur with that idea.
At school I learnt about masturbation ('cos clearly I needed to know at 12), about homosexual sex (I was already having nightmares about the fact my parents did it!! That freaked me out..but hey I'm straight) about how right and normal it was to experience sexual behaviour outside of any marital environment - now that I'm 30+ I think that's balooney (IMHO) but back then I had no critical powers to question any of that with. I remember all these red faced 12 year old just dying of embarrassment and the one cocky kid (is that unfortunate phrasing or what) making 'hilarious' comments about body parts etc.. in other words the whole experience was quite horrific - marginally as bad as having my mum try and explain it but that's another story. It was about this time that I also saw first hand the effects of this experimentation when a girl dropped out of school pregnant. That was probably the best lesson I ever had - sex in the wrong place at the wrong time is irresponsible foolishness that can potentially ruin lives.
I have seen loads of really awful situations where young people made really bad decisions regarding sex and the effects are felt by everyone:
1/ They are left looking after children when emotionally they are often just children themselves.
2/ Many find they are unable to financially support themselves becasue they have to drop out of school , can't get a job, have to spend all their time and money on the kids - and crucially many many times the father has done a bunk and will not take finacial and emotional responsibility for the child and mother.
3/ The family is often affected (financially to support their children and the new grandchild), emotionally to try and hold things together while they make the most of teh situation.
4/ Finally I've seen some of the kids and the effect not having a father has in the home and the effect that being taught by children has on them.
That's the best side of that coin.
The worst is the abortions - the mental trauma of kids having to sneak in to clinics to avoid shame and guilt, the physical trauma of having a small life ripped apart (including the rarely discussed problem that it is much harder to conceive after abortion) and then their are the medical staff who have to do this.
All of these problems won't go away by teaching religion but for every one that is avoided surely that is a good thing. In my experience those with a strong religious conviction as kids rarely have children outside of marriage (of course it happens but nowhere near as much.) We can talk ourselves silly about philosophical reasons to exclude religion but the results speak for themselves. My two years door knocking left an indelible print on me as I waded through house after house telling the same cr*ppy story. This is just one reason why I oppose taking religion out of our public life, our schools and effectively our conscience. I don't propose teaching everyone to be nice little goody two shoe mormons just to stop this thirst for godless existence permeating everything we do and say.
I always loved this quote from A Man For All Seasons for it gave an eloquent description of how 'God' and secularism could go hand in hand and their would be no need to argue - God can have what's His (religion), Ceaser can have what's Ceasers and our schools can teach many ideas without ending up with one extreme or the other (I would never ever suggest a purely theological approach to school or even life in general) - surely their is room for us all.
More: There is no law against that.
Roper: There is! God's law!
More: Then God can arrest him.
Roper: Sophistication upon sophistication.
More: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal.
Roper: Then you set man's law above God's!
More: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact - I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of the law, oh, there I'm a forrester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God....
Alice: While you talk, he's gone!
More: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law!
Roper: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law!
More: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
Roper: I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you - where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast - man's laws, not God's - and if you cut them down - and you're just the man to do it - d'you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. -
Pole
if we are all here by pure chance
Slightly off topic, but this seems to be a misconception. There is nothing like "pure chance" outside the world of theoretical mathematics - at least not in the sense of "pure entropy" which is how many creationists tend to use the notion of chance to discredit evolution.
In the biological world, entropy is always severly limited by deterministic factors. Which is why life was more likely to develop on the Earth rather than on the Sun.
Back to the topic: I share the opinion of those of you who have said creationism relies heavily on negative reasoning. If you think of it, it mystifies more than it explains.
Can anyone outline a 10 lesson course in creationism? Wouldn't such an attempt be doomed to become another "Life?How Did It Get Here? By Evolution or by Creation?" book?
The first 8 chapters contain evidence for refuting evolution.
The next six focus on a biassed selection of natural wonders (This can be taught in a biology course).
Chapter 15: "Why do many accept evolution?" (Yet more negative evidence)
Chapter 16: "Why would God permit sufferring" (Now that's real science).
Chapter 19: "An earthly paradise soon to come." (So is that the gist of creationism?) Of course you may prefer to have a "heavenly" paradise discussed here.
Chapter 20: "What choice will you make?" (Do we really have to answer that?)
Pole -
seattleniceguy
Nice summary, Pole. This encapsulates the entire problem with creationism: it doesn't really have anything to say except that evolution is not true. It doesn't propose any other mechanism for the diversity of life, except magic, which is not testable, and therefore not science.
SNG
-
EvilForce
Yes Q, let's not teach them about sex...let's teach them abstinence only...
A new eight-year study just released reveals that American teenagers who take "virginity" pledges of the sort so favored by the Bush administration wind up with just as many STDs as the other kids. But that's not all -- taking the pledges also makes a teenage girl six times more likely to perform oral sex, and a boy four times more likely to get anal.
For a bunch of teens raised on creationism, these red state kids today are pretty evolved -- sexually, anyway, and for that they can thank all who joined forces to try and legislate away human nature, specifically the ineluctable urge of teenagers to hump.
Yes, the "What do we tell the children?" crowd apparently decided not to tell them anything. Because people who talk about pee-pees are potty-mouths. And so armed with limited knowledge, and believing regular, vaginal intercourse to be either immaculate or filthy dirty, these kids did with their pledge what everybody does with contracts: they found loopholes. Two of them to be exact.
Is there any greater irony than the fact that the Christian Right actually got their precious little adolescent daughters to say to their freshly scrubbed boyfriends: "Please, I want to remain pure for my wedding night, so only in the ass. Then I'll blow you." Well, at least these kids are really thinking outside the box.
There's a lot worse things than teenagers having sex, namely, teenagers NOT having sex. Here's something you'll never hear: "That suicide bomber blew himself up because he was having too much sex. Sex, sex, sex, non-stop. All that crazy Arab ever had was sex, and look what happened."
Well, that's our story -- of how faith and the party of smaller government combined to turn your kids into a generation of super-freaks. Which shouldn't be surprising: Prohibition didn't work, "Just say no" didn't work, and I understand there's a host of Americans who illegally obtain and smoke marijuana. They're the ones who've been giggling every time I say anal sex.
Quoted from my friend Bill M.