dyanaprajna2011
Dharmapala
If any creationist wants to explain how creationism is science and follows the scientific method, I started a thread here: http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/science-religion/159700-creationism-scientific-method.html
-
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!
Where tax money funds public schools teaching creationism as science
- Thread starter dyanaprajna2011
- Start date
Whether Hitler misunderstood and perverted what Darwin taught is not the issue. The fact remains that he and many others whose world view includes belief in evolution justify their violence using evolution as their rationale for "survival of the fittest". Thus, as mentioned in an earlier post, I believe the ToE served and still serves as the philosophical underpinnings for much of the oppression, wars, and violence that still plague mankind.
So when some crackpot misuses something in a way it was never meant for, it's the fault of what they're misusing? You should be fighting against the Bible and the Qur'an, then, if you want to be consistent. Those two books are the source of more suffering and strife in this world than the theory of evolution ever was. And don't give me that "no true Scotsman" bs, either.
1. How is teaching science as science "totalitarian control"? Are we going to start teaching religious dogma in science classes now just because some people are getting offended that religious mythology and superstition isn't being taught as scientific truth?
ID theory is not religious dogma, as I'm sure you are aware. Thus your question is biased and based on a false premise.
2. If we teach Christian versions of creationism in science classes, why not Hindu? Why not Islamic? Why not any of the other 200 + religious creation myths?
Again, labeling scientific theories such as ID as creationism is false and misleading. Nor is teaching creation myth the issue here, as you should be aware.
3. If we start teaching religious creation myths as science, why stop there? Why not start teaching kids that germs don't cause disease, but god does when you do wrong? Or, gravity isn't what keeps things down, it's god? Or, the earth doesn't float in space supported by nothing, but by the gods? Where does it stop?
This question, IMO, is another disingenuous additional attempt to discredit scientific theories accepted by scientists, such as ID.
4. If evolution is so wrong, how has it been right in the advances in medicine that has occurred due to our knowledge of evolution?
You presuppose knowledge of evolution played a role in advancing medicine, but cite no example.
Evolutionists often seem to have a knack for twisting facts, redirecting, and ignoring any evidence that does not support their worldview, overwhelming evidence, IMO, against evolution. Yet they fight any attempt to introduce honest debate in schools, or even acknowledge alternative theories to evolution are scientific.
ID theory is not religious dogma, as I'm sure you are aware. Thus your question is biased and based on a false premise.
2. If we teach Christian versions of creationism in science classes, why not Hindu? Why not Islamic? Why not any of the other 200 + religious creation myths?
Again, labeling scientific theories such as ID as creationism is false and misleading. Nor is teaching creation myth the issue here, as you should be aware.
3. If we start teaching religious creation myths as science, why stop there? Why not start teaching kids that germs don't cause disease, but god does when you do wrong? Or, gravity isn't what keeps things down, it's god? Or, the earth doesn't float in space supported by nothing, but by the gods? Where does it stop?
This question, IMO, is another disingenuous additional attempt to discredit scientific theories accepted by scientists, such as ID.
4. If evolution is so wrong, how has it been right in the advances in medicine that has occurred due to our knowledge of evolution?
You presuppose knowledge of evolution played a role in advancing medicine, but cite no example.
Evolutionists often seem to have a knack for twisting facts, redirecting, and ignoring any evidence that does not support their worldview, overwhelming evidence, IMO, against evolution. Yet they fight any attempt to introduce honest debate in schools, or even acknowledge alternative theories to evolution are scientific.
Last edited:
I believe millions share the belief in "survival of the fittest" and this belief does influence their conduct. If evolution is a lie, and I believe it is, this lie supports the violence we've seen and been affected by all our lives. I can only speak for the Bible, and the Bible does not support the idea that it is OK to murder and oppress your fellowman in the interest of surviving. And to claim there are not true Christians and false Christians is simply wrong, IMO, just as it is not true that there are no true Scotsmen. That is a fallacious and erroneous argument.
Did you read what I said about social Darwinism being a fiction? It's based on ignorance on what evolution is and how it works. No one who knows much about evolution believes that nonsense.
The Bible has many verses which can be used to support violence and hatred, and has been used for centuries to support those things. It's much easier to use the Bible to buttress beliefs that lead to horrible treatment of others than it is to use evolutionary theory because religious writings are vague and can be made to say whatever you want them to say. Scientific theories aren't like that. You're either misusing it or not. You can't say the same for religious texts because they're largely abstract.
I'm not interested in your idea of what a "true Christian" is. It's irrelevant.
dyanaprajna2011
Dharmapala
Just the same as Christianity. I find it quite telling of your bias and utter irrationality that you're completely missing the point.
dyanaprajna2011
Dharmapala
So once again, rusra, you've failed to actually answer any questions, and instead inject your own bias and ignorance where it's not needed. ID is religious dogma, not science, plain and simple. And the only "scientists" who accept it propose Christian creationism. I'm done trying to interject reason where it's not wanted or accepted. I'm done.
dawny0826
Mother Heathen
They do not teach creationism in our local public schools. They wouldn't have time if they could!
The problem in our local school systems is that everything revolves around a dang Standards Of Learning testing system. There's honestly less concern as to what your children really GRASPS by way of math, science, english, the works...as long as they are scoring well enough.
Kids can't spell or read worth crap, but, if they can fill in the right bubbles when it's testing time...it's all good...
The problem in our local school systems is that everything revolves around a dang Standards Of Learning testing system. There's honestly less concern as to what your children really GRASPS by way of math, science, english, the works...as long as they are scoring well enough.
Kids can't spell or read worth crap, but, if they can fill in the right bubbles when it's testing time...it's all good...
Last edited:
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
Hitler was raised Christian, went to a Christian school, claimed he was Christian, and used the Bible to raise his Christian country against the Jewish people. He claimed they killed Jesus.
*
Natural selection and microevolution posit "survival of the fittest" as well. Do you deny either of those two things? They seem to be rather necessary to explain how a few thousand kinds carried aboard the ark could become the millions of species we see today. The effects that a theory have on human behavior are completely irrelevant to the truth or falsehood of that theory. Nature would still be a very violent thing without evolution.
dyanaprajna2011
Dharmapala
rusra, if I'm not mistaken, isn't the premise of ID simply that everything had design and creation from a higher power? If this is the case, then ID can certainly contain the idea of evolution, correct? as long as it was guided by this higher power?
That is not the question at hand, is it? The fact is that ID is banned from being taught in U.S. schools as "unscientific". Anyone interested in the real definition of ID can google it.
Yes, so?
FranklinMichaelV.3
Well-Known Member
Lol so it shouldn't be taught in a science class. Teach it in a religion class.
dyanaprajna2011
Dharmapala
So in other words, you don't want to answer the question; I'm curious as to why. Afraid of what the logical response might be?
Enai de a lukal
Well-Known Member
There's actually a Bill Hicks bit about exactly that-
"There's a great story going around the states right now. These
fundamentalist Christians down South -- yeah, like where else are they
gonna be? These fundamentalist Christians in Brussels...
Anyway, down south, they're trying to get creationism taught in schools as a
science. Now, other than the obvious objection: IT'S NOT ONE, I think
it would be a killer idea. It would definitely be the shortest class
of the day. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth..." Ok,
see you at the final!"
-- The Late/Great Bill Hicks
That's pretty much it; you could cover the entirety of creationist "science" in about 90 seconds.
Anyways, RE: the OP... Remind me again how the eff this is legal? Taxpayer funded religious ed? (not to mention the constitutional violation)
So sad, so depressing, so scary...
