freethinker44
Well-Known Member
I want to see equal airtime on religious shows reserved for atheism or science. I'd actually just settle for a crawler at the bottom of the screen that fact checks everything they say.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
"Creationists demand equal airtime on Neil deGrasse Tysons Cosmos to provide balance"
- Thread starter Skwim
- Start date
And the creationist understanding of science is not as deep as those dancers bellybuttons.
The Neo Nerd
Well-Known Member
Ive watched this and really liked it. NDT is a great science communicator.
Naming the vessel "Ship of Imagination" may not have been their best move though.
Naming the vessel "Ship of Imagination" may not have been their best move though.
They can whine all they want. I don't want to see creationist junk on a science program. It has no place being there. They should be marginalized (people who believe that Genesis is literal; people who simply believe that their deity/deities had a hand in evolution or the beginnings of the universe are okay but it still doesn't belong on a science program). We should treat them the same way we treat people who believe in shape-shifting lizard people.
With the same fundamental level of respect and dignity granted to any person? With manners, decency, tact, kindness, and understanding? That is what you were going to say, right? :sarcastic
No. Why should we give any respect to beliefs that are batty? They have the right to believe them, but we should we humor them?
technomage
Finding my own way
Because your beliefs are every bit as batty as theirs.
(Don't feel lonely--so are mine.)
Because your beliefs are every bit as batty as theirs.
(Don't feel lonely--so are mine.)
No. I don't believe the world is 6,000 years old and don't wish to have my religious beliefs taught as fact to schoolkids. Don't insult me in such ways. I don't know why people feel the need to coddle people who wish to brainwash and mislead.
technomage
Finding my own way
Nope. You don't believe the world is 6.000 years old ... but that is not your only belief.
I point you to our earlier discussion of anarcho-communism. I _possibly_ point you to your theistic Satanism, but since I don't know the full details, I can't say they're definitely batty.
Frank, NONE of us is immune to batty beliefs. We're all human.
I believe he borrowed that from Sagan.
And even then, it was not inappropriate at all.
You don't get it, do you? I'm not promoting teaching my personal views in a science classroom. Groups like Answers in Genesis are. But you're taking the moment to play PC police and insult me by pretending that I'm "just as bad". No, I'm not and I don't appreciate you saying that. My personal political views are nowhere near believing that the world is 6,000 years old, which is in violation of science and recorded history.
Well, I suppose if you don't mind being a dick to people, then you shouldn't?
That's the alternative to granting everyone a certain baseline level of respect and dignity, you know: being a dick to people. Basic respect doesn't mean you agree with them. It doesn't mean you have to let them into your science classrooms. It doesn't even mean you have to listen to them. It means you have enough respect for human diversity that you can have basic, courteous, social interactions with anyone and not condemn others simply for not being you. Shocking, I know.
technomage
Finding my own way
Actually, yes, I do. You're upset because I'm pointing out that you have no moral high ground.
Insisting that you do--contrary to facts--is your privilege.
Actually, yes, I do. You're upset because I'm pointing out that you have no moral high ground.
Actually, I do have the high moral ground here since I'm not trying to feed people falsehoods under the veneer of truth.
I think it's arguable that you might even have a moral duty to expose batty beliefs, if you are in a position to do so, and there is some chance of your exposure changing minds. After all, if you have a moral obligation to prevent harm to others, and if batty beliefs can cause harm to others, don't you have a moral obligation to expose batty beliefs, if you can?
Well, I suppose if you don't mind being a dick to people, then you shouldn't?
That's the alternative to granting everyone a certain baseline level of respect and dignity, you know: being a dick to people. Basic respect doesn't mean you agree with them. It doesn't mean you have to let them into your science classrooms. It doesn't even mean you have to listen to them. It means you have enough respect for human diversity that you can have basic, courteous, social interactions with anyone and not condemn others simply for not being you. Shocking, I know.
Oh, I can be nice to them, as long as we avoid certain topics. I don't prefer to associate with such people, however. I spent enough time in fringe conspiracy circles and I'm still trying to heal my mind from that lunacy.
That's true.
technomage
Finding my own way
Frank, if you will note, I said nothing about what you, or they, _do_ with those beliefs. Most folks who hold to creationism are not involved in politics, therefore, they are not "trying to feed people falsehoods under the veneer of truth."
I am commenting SOLELY on what beliefs people hold.