| Are you glad at this victory? |
| Yes. We must keep our traditions and our historical ideals from the beginning of the United States strong. |
|
37% |
[ 6 ] |
| Somewhat. |
|
18% |
[ 3 ] |
| No. Religion has NO place in government. |
|
43% |
[ 7 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 16 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
 Fri Jan 14, 2005 6:30 pm |
|
| Hitchhiker wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | They don't necessarily have to be TAUGHT. Just referenced.
And no, intelligent design is a logical theory stating that something, or someone, had to have designed all this. The sun, the moon, the stars, the galaxy, the univers--it all couldn't just be natural. |
That's the anthropic principle.  I find it self-centred and rather convenient. It is not blatantly defeatist, but it leads to explaining this as based on intelligence rather than seeking alternative explanations.
I like the 'many-worlds' theory myself.  |
That and evolution should be taught both, in my opinion. However, other ideas should just be REFERENCED.
And I see no way that it is "self centered." I see it as the opposite.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 6:34 pm |
|
Well, then you should refrence all religions point of view on how the world and universe were started. Native American, Hindu, etc.
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 6:36 pm |
|
| IntrepidIsMe wrote: | | Well, then you should refrence all religions point of view on how the world and universe were started. Native American, Hindu, etc. |
Intelligent Design has more factual backing than others. But sure, that's fine then. But EITHER WAY you should REFERENCE the other common views.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Hitchhiker
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 3514
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 6:38 pm |
|
I am less interested in finding out what created the universe than how it is created. Evolution discusses the mechanism of creation, not the creator itself. I'll let religion handle 'creation' itself, and science deal with the assembly guide.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 6:40 pm |
|
| Hitchhiker wrote: | | I am less interested in finding out what created the universe than how it is created. Evolution discusses the mechanism of creation, not the creator itself. I'll let religion handle 'creation' itself, and science deal with the assembly guide. |
But discussing how that theory could be played out is good and right and gives more opening. If you are ONLY allowing Evolution to be discussed, then you are greatly influencing students. Just ain't right, just ain't right.
--EDIT--
And intelligent design does NOT talk about the "creator" persay, just a designer and how the Universe couldn't have just been created and work the way it does.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Hitchhiker
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 3514
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 6:44 pm |
|
I favour no 'theory' at all.
Discuss the how, not a doctrine of the how. Discuss how currently scientists believe that life is all made of things called DNA. Mention evolution, mention intelligent design, but I don't care what you call it. Life is made of DNA, which make genes, which form cells, et cetera.
The only thing that we can stamp evolution upon is because Darwin coined the term to refer to the progression and adaptation of a species to suit their environment. Evolution itself doesn't have anything to do with creation, nor with DNA or cell structure, it is merely a convenient name for a theory that life adapts.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 6:45 pm |
|
| Hitchhiker wrote: | I favour no 'theory' at all.
Discuss the how, not a doctrine of the how. Discuss how currently scientists believe that life is all made of things called DNA. Mention evolution, mention intelligent design, but I don't care what you call it. Life is made of DNA, which make genes, which form cells, et cetera.
The only thing that we can stamp evolution upon is because Darwin coined the term to refer to the progression and adaptation of a species to suit their environment. Evolution itself doesn't have anything to do with creation, nor with DNA or cell structure, it is merely a convenient name for a theory that life adapts. |
I agree with that. Reference other kinds, too. But forcing students to learn one theory and one theory only is not right. ESPECIALLY if it's not their choice to take that class, and it's required.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 6:54 pm |
|
Now, I just want to state, because I know that this will be brought up, that this is DIFFERENT from, say, saying the Plege of Allegiance in schools. When the announcement every day at my school happens, we are told to respect other people's opinions if they do not wish to say it. Sure. That's fine. They don't have to say it. I don't respect them, no, but it's their right not to, and that's fine. But in a class that teachers Evolution and it's NOT selectively chosen and that being the only idea that TEACHERS TEACH STUDENTS...that's what I'm talking about.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Kyre
Commodore
Joined: 15 Mar 2002
Posts: 1263
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 10:01 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | They don't have to say it. I don't respect them, no, but it's their right not to, and that's fine. |
Why not?
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 10:03 pm |
|
| Kyre wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | They don't have to say it. I don't respect them, no, but it's their right not to, and that's fine. |
Why not? |
Well, if they have religious objections, then it's fine. But otherwise, they are disrespecting our country. I know several students who don't say it, but not for religious reasons, and one of them even doesn't because it's a protest of Bush. I think that it is disrespecting of our country.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Kyre
Commodore
Joined: 15 Mar 2002
Posts: 1263
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 10:08 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | Kyre wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | They don't have to say it. I don't respect them, no, but it's their right not to, and that's fine. |
Why not? |
Well, if they have religious objections, then it's fine. But otherwise, they are disrespecting our country. I know several students who don't say it, but not for religious reasons, and one of them even doesn't because it's a protest of Bush. I think that it is disrespecting of our country. |
What about all those American freedoms you folks enjoy so much?
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 10:11 pm |
|
| Kyre wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | Kyre wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | They don't have to say it. I don't respect them, no, but it's their right not to, and that's fine. |
Why not? |
Well, if they have religious objections, then it's fine. But otherwise, they are disrespecting our country. I know several students who don't say it, but not for religious reasons, and one of them even doesn't because it's a protest of Bush. I think that it is disrespecting of our country. |
What about all those American freedoms you folks enjoy so much? |
I know, and I accept that, and think that it's within their rights, but I just don't like nor respect it. Although I don't want their right to to be changed.
--EDITED--
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Link, the Hero of Time
Vice Admiral
Joined: 15 Sep 2001
Posts: 5581
Location: Kokori Forest, Hyrule
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 11:00 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | I agree with that. Reference other kinds, too. But forcing students to learn one theory and one theory only is not right. ESPECIALLY if it's not their choice to take that class, and it's required. |
The students aren't forced to learn anything. In most schools teachers talk about the THEORY of evolution not the LAW of evolution. A theory is a hypothesis that has been proven right over a series of tests. They are not shoving Evolution down children's throats as an all around fact of life.
Creationism cannot be called a theory because there is not scientific basis, same goes for most religions.
And since the schools are being funded to teach Scientific points of view; Creationism, Adamism, and most religious hypotheses are left out.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 11:01 pm |
|
| Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | I agree with that. Reference other kinds, too. But forcing students to learn one theory and one theory only is not right. ESPECIALLY if it's not their choice to take that class, and it's required. |
The students aren't forced to learn anything. In most schools teachers talk about the THEORY of evolution not the LAW of evolution. A theory is a hypothesis that has been proven right over a series of tests. They are not shoving Evolution down children's throats as an all around fact of life.
Creationism cannot be called a theory because there is not scientific basis, same goes for most religions.
And since the schools are being funded to teach Scientific points of view; Creationism, Adamism, and most religious hypotheses are left out. |
While that IS a good point, it is very much incorrect. Evolution was taught to me as near-fact. And it's taught like that to so others. But at least REFERENCE them, anyways. ESPECIALLY if they HAVE to take the class.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 11:06 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | I agree with that. Reference other kinds, too. But forcing students to learn one theory and one theory only is not right. ESPECIALLY if it's not their choice to take that class, and it's required. |
The students aren't forced to learn anything. In most schools teachers talk about the THEORY of evolution not the LAW of evolution. A theory is a hypothesis that has been proven right over a series of tests. They are not shoving Evolution down children's throats as an all around fact of life.
Creationism cannot be called a theory because there is not scientific basis, same goes for most religions.
And since the schools are being funded to teach Scientific points of view; Creationism, Adamism, and most religious hypotheses are left out. |
While that IS a good point, it is very much incorrect. Evolution was taught to me as near-fact. And it's taught like that to so others. But at least REFERENCE them, anyways. ESPECIALLY if they HAVE to take the class. |
Well, y'know, I was bashed horribly in school by teachers and students alike when I questioned evolution, it was only in college that my teacher was okay with it. It WAS fact when I was in public school, and they shouldn't teach it like it is. Any scientist will tell you that NOTHING is written in stone, no matter what. I resent the school system for that.
|
|
|
Link, the Hero of Time
Vice Admiral
Joined: 15 Sep 2001
Posts: 5581
Location: Kokori Forest, Hyrule
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 11:08 pm |
|
That's because Evolution is almost near-fact.
A teacher cannot reference ideas from other religions. Athiest parents or students may then sue the school, same as an islamic student can sue for being taught Catholic creationism.
A school cannot afford to take chances.
As my science teacher told me; "There are plenty of other ideas. If you want to know more about them, research them yourself."
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 11:11 pm |
|
| Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | That's because Evolution is almost near-fact.
A teacher cannot reference ideas from other religions. Athiest parents or students may then sue the school, same as an islamic student can sue for being taught Catholic creationism.
A school cannot afford to take chances.
As my science teacher told me; "There are plenty of other ideas. If you want to know more about them, research them yourself." |
I don't care. I should've sued my school for teaching evolution, and evolution only! All you need to do is list down all other possibilities on a sheet of paper that you can think of and a way to find out about them, print it out, hand it to the students, and tell them to show their parents. On the top of it it will state what this is for. What's wrong with that? You're not forcing an idea on a student, like you are with evolution.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 11:18 pm |
|
| Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | That's because Evolution is almost near-fact.
A teacher cannot reference ideas from other religions. Athiest parents or students may then sue the school, same as an islamic student can sue for being taught Catholic creationism.
A school cannot afford to take chances.
As my science teacher told me; "There are plenty of other ideas. If you want to know more about them, research them yourself." |
How about "Seperation of Atheism and State?"
Evolution is NOT near-fact. It is very vehemently disputed, and if they want to teach evolution, they should teach the counterargument. Teach WHY it's questioned, ask for critical thinking and discussion, not blind acceptance! You can teach discretion without teaching a particular side.
|
|
|
Kyre
Commodore
Joined: 15 Mar 2002
Posts: 1263
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 11:20 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | That's because Evolution is almost near-fact.
A teacher cannot reference ideas from other religions. Athiest parents or students may then sue the school, same as an islamic student can sue for being taught Catholic creationism.
A school cannot afford to take chances.
As my science teacher told me; "There are plenty of other ideas. If you want to know more about them, research them yourself." |
I don't care. I should've sued my school for teaching evolution, and evolution only! All you need to do is list down all other possibilities on a sheet of paper that you can think of and a way to find out about them, print it out, hand it to the students, and tell them to show their parents. On the top of it it will state what this is for. What's wrong with that? You're not forcing an idea on a student, like you are with evolution. |
When, exactly, did you become such a livid supporter of God?
|
|
|
Defiant
Fleet Admiral
Joined: 04 Jul 2001
Posts: 15946
Location: Oregon City, OR
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 11:23 pm |
|
According to the poll, you are losing. We should show it to the courts.
|
|
|
Link, the Hero of Time
Vice Admiral
Joined: 15 Sep 2001
Posts: 5581
Location: Kokori Forest, Hyrule
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 11:28 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | I don't care. I should've sued my school for teaching evolution, and evolution only! |
Your Lawsuit would be seen and then laughed at by the judge before he Throws the case out and reminds you of "Seperation of Church and state"
| Republican_Man wrote: | | All you need to do is list down all other possibilities on a sheet of paper that you can think of and a way to find out about them, print it out, hand it to the students, and tell them to show their parents. On the top of it it will state what this is for. What's wrong with that? You're not forcing an idea on a student, like you are with evolution. |
At that point in time a teacher can be fired for bringing and teaching religion in the classroom.
| Exalya wrote: | | How about "Seperation of Atheism and State?" |
There is no such law therefor your argument is invalidated.
| Exalya wrote: | | Evolution is NOT near-fact. It is very vehemently disputed, and if they want to teach evolution, they should teach the counterargument. Teach WHY it's questioned, ask for critical thinking and discussion, not blind acceptance! You can teach discretion without teaching a particular side. |
Evolution is more near-fact then any form of creationism. The Theory of evolution tells how mutations occur to help organisms adapt to their environments. That is the Theory in its purest form.
Again, a school can be sued for teaching any form of religious belief, therefore they CANNOT teach it.
-------signature-------
"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." President Thomas Jefferson
"A man's respect for law and order exists in precise relationship to the size of his paycheck." Adam Clayton Powell Jr.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 11:28 pm |
|
| Exalya wrote: | | Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | That's because Evolution is almost near-fact.
A teacher cannot reference ideas from other religions. Athiest parents or students may then sue the school, same as an islamic student can sue for being taught Catholic creationism.
A school cannot afford to take chances.
As my science teacher told me; "There are plenty of other ideas. If you want to know more about them, research them yourself." |
How about "Seperation of Atheism and State?"
Evolution is NOT near-fact. It is very vehemently disputed, and if they want to teach evolution, they should teach the counterargument. Teach WHY it's questioned, ask for critical thinking and discussion, not blind acceptance! You can teach discretion without teaching a particular side. |
EXACTLY!
| Kyre wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | That's because Evolution is almost near-fact.
A teacher cannot reference ideas from other religions. Athiest parents or students may then sue the school, same as an islamic student can sue for being taught Catholic creationism.
A school cannot afford to take chances.
As my science teacher told me; "There are plenty of other ideas. If you want to know more about them, research them yourself." |
I don't care. I should've sued my school for teaching evolution, and evolution only! All you need to do is list down all other possibilities on a sheet of paper that you can think of and a way to find out about them, print it out, hand it to the students, and tell them to show their parents. On the top of it it will state what this is for. What's wrong with that? You're not forcing an idea on a student, like you are with evolution. |
When, exactly, did you become such a livid supporter of God? |
Where have you been?
And Defiant, I don't agree with the results thus far and your latter sentence.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Kyre
Commodore
Joined: 15 Mar 2002
Posts: 1263
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 11:30 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | Where have you been? |
It was a genuine question. Age ten? Age fifteen? Forever?
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 11:34 pm |
|
| Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | I don't care. I should've sued my school for teaching evolution, and evolution only! |
Your Lawsuit would be seen and then laughed at by the judge before he Throws the case out and reminds you of "Seperation of Church and state"
But I would fight it with other things.
| Republican_Man wrote: | | All you need to do is list down all other possibilities on a sheet of paper that you can think of and a way to find out about them, print it out, hand it to the students, and tell them to show their parents. On the top of it it will state what this is for. What's wrong with that? You're not forcing an idea on a student, like you are with evolution. |
At that point in time a teacher can be fired for bringing and teaching religion in the classroom.
That can be swerved around, including by a court that's not in California.
| Exalya wrote: | | How about "Seperation of Atheism and State?" |
There is no such law therefor your argument is invalidated.
Technically it's just a myth, but yes, you're right somewhat. However, the principal is the same.
| Exalya wrote: | | Evolution is NOT near-fact. It is very vehemently disputed, and if they want to teach evolution, they should teach the counterargument. Teach WHY it's questioned, ask for critical thinking and discussion, not blind acceptance! You can teach discretion without teaching a particular side. |
Evolution is more near-fact then any form of creationism. The Theory of evolution tells how mutations occur to help organisms adapt to their environments. That is the Theory in its purest form.
Again, a school can be sued for teaching any form of religious belief, therefore they CANNOT teach it. |
Still. You should STILL REFERENCE THAT.
And again, a teacher COULD type on the sheet AND EXPLAIN TO THE CLASS his reasons! That way the parents would know. "You never told my kid why."
"Check the sheet." JUST REFERENCE!
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri Jan 14, 2005 11:35 pm |
|
| Kyre wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | Where have you been? |
It was a genuine question. Age ten? Age fifteen? Forever? |
A few years ago, when I saw the secular war begin to heat up in this country.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
