religion in the classroom: it ain't just for hillbillies no more

[Love-it]

When the idea of teaching Creationism was being discussed in my school district while I was in high school, my biology teacher gave a great answer: "I am here to teach science, not mythology. Creationism has no place in my classroom." The reason this shocked so many: my biology teacher was a Catholic priest. He advocated the co-existence of science and religion, but he realised that one could not take the place of the other.

Kudo's to the priest for understanding that the separation of church and state can be lived and taught.

 

[JustAsking]

I'm encouraged when I hear clergy taking stands like this. The U.S. needs more responsible people of faith to come forward and draw a clear differentiation between what constitutes bona fide religious faith and what constitutes objective science. The two should simply not mix.

You are so right, speedoguy. Fundamentalists are no more Christian than Klansmen carrying Bibles are. The mainstream denominations find no conflict between science and religion. For example, here is something right out of the Catholic Catechism. The other major denominations have a similar belief.

I think the mainstream denominations have the same trouble that the Democrats do, and that is that the real truth doesn't fit as well into Fox News soundbites as do the bumper sticker theologies of the Fundamentalists and the slogans of the Neocons. I wish they would do us all a favor and speak out frequently and vocally and save us from these neanderthals.

 

[Love-it]

This topic gives new meaning to the famous Karl Marx quote: "Religion is the opiate of the masses." He must have meant that the masses were smoking their opiates.

 

[madame_zora]

I'm encouraged when I hear both teachers and clergy endorsing keeping science and religion each in their proper fora. Government in education is scary enough without adding "fundamentalist" to the mix. I've said all along that they only reason these idiots voted to allow this shit to happen is because they AGREE with it, not becase they agree with the principle of letting the government make our decisions for us. I'm quite certain that the group who voted to make THEIR religion the law of the land won't be voting to make the same allowances for the next group. Hippocritical fucks.

 

[B_DoubleMeatWhopper]

When the idea of teaching Creationism was being discussed in my school district while I was in high school, my biology teacher gave a great answer: "I am here to teach science, not mythology. Creationism has no place in my classroom." The reason this shocked so many: my biology teacher was a Catholic priest. He advocated the co-existence of science and religion, but he realised that one could not take the place of the other.

Just an addendum: this same priest also taught freshman theology, so he taught both science and religion in separate classes. I can't comment on what his theology classes were like because I didn't arrive in the US until I was the appropriate age to enroll as a sophomore, so he didn't teach me as a freshman. But I did have him as a biology teacher, and religion didn't enter into his teaching there.

 

[Average_joe]

This kind of argument was debated in a Pennsylvania court about ten years ago. Backward Dubya supporting teachers wanted Creationism taught in Science lessons!!
Then not so smart science / religious types came up with 'Intellegent Design' (to imply that 'God' created everything scientifically) .... this was, of course, immediately proven bollocks!

*sighs* So they scientifically proved that God did not have a hand in creation?


I think that this has to be the scariest part of the article.

On the other side of the debate, the historian Meenakshi Jain, a self-described nationalist, says that history is meant to be rewritten, depending on the perspective and needs of the present time.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/CSM/story?id=1534056

 

[rawbone8]

I think that this has to be the scariest part of the article.

On the other side of the debate, the historian Meenakshi Jain, a self-described nationalist, says that history is meant to be rewritten, depending on the perspective and needs of the present time.

Yeah. How dare they. Don't they know it's only the victors who get to rewrite history depending on the perspective and needs of the victors.

Come out with your hardest biting junkyard dogma and may the best creed win.

 

[Dr Rock]

*sighs* So they scientifically proved that God did not have a hand in creation

don't be dense. you don't prove a negative. the fact that there is no evidence for the existence of god/s is all that's necessary to discredit religious dogma like "intelligent design theory."

 

[Number 51]

don't be dense. you don't prove a negative. the fact that there is no evidence for the existence of god/s is all that's necessary to discredit religious dogma like "intelligent design theory."

Uh, there's no evidence that God doesn't exist, either....

 

[Average_joe]

don't be dense. you don't prove a negative. the fact that there is no evidence for the existence of god/s is all that's necessary to discredit religious dogma like "intelligent design theory."

Yes, yes. I understand the whole concept of where the burden of proof falls. I don't think that neccesarily applies to the point I was making.

The way Hammer's statement was written, it implied that there was some kind of overwhelming evidence that there was no such thing as intelligent design.

...this was, of course, immediately proven bollocks!

Perhaps a better way to put it was there was a lack of proof on the side of intelligent design.

I'm sure you'll probablhy be able to pull this apart too, but I'm too tired to come up with a better argument. Studying Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates and applying what they wrote to dramatic theory will do a number on most anyone's minds.

 

[madame_zora]

Yeah. How dare they. Don't they know it's only the victors who get to rewrite history depending on the perspective and needs of the victors.

Come out with your hardest biting junkyard dogma and may the best creed win.

Isn't it funny how quickly reality degenerates into nonsense once you realise this?

 

[AlteredEgo]

And people always look at me sideways when I say I want to be a housewife so I can home school my children.

 

[Dr Rock]

Uh, there's no evidence that God doesn't exist, either....

go back and try again. read -> comprehend -> respond. the middle part is just as important as the other two.

The way Hammer's statement was written, it implied that there was some kind of overwhelming evidence that there was no such thing as intelligent design.

as opposed to the fact that there's no evidence FOR it? what, exactly, is the practicable difference?

 

[invisibleman]

I think that religion is more about devaluing and deevolution of spirit than the evolution of it. It is more about control: Control over what you think, how you see things, and what you do, and how you do it. I think that sometimes religion isn't helpful for a person's evolution. God doesn't have to destroy the world. We do just fine destroying ourselves. There's historical evidence to support that. Even there are extreme exceptions to the following: I think that we as humans are neither totally good or totally bad. We are the grey areas. Religion doesn't deal with the sophistication and selfishness of the human spirit. We want to evolve. We want to be free. Do our own thing. As always, man (even the religious minded ones have) has done each other a lot worse than they've done Jesus. Historically proven. (Even worse in the name of God).

 

[B_DoubleMeatWhopper]

I think that religion is more about devaluing and deevolution of spirit than the evolution of it. It is more about control: Control over what you think, how you see things, and what you do, and how you do it.

That's not religion; that's the perversion of religion as pushed by the modern-day Pharisees that claim to know the mind of God and have a handle on one-size-fits-all morality. The practicing Faithful who reject spiritual oppression don't deserve to be lumped in with the hypocrites that spout condemnation from the pulpit.

 

[invisibleman]

DMW--I agree with you totally.

 

[Dr Rock]

The practicing Faithful who reject spiritual oppression don't deserve to be lumped in with the hypocrites that spout condemnation from the pulpit.

then get rid of them

 

[Number 51]

go back and try again. read -> comprehend -> respond. the middle part is just as important as the other two.

I did, and it's just as non-dispositive as when you said it the first time.

Hint: consider the ways in which we "know" things.

 

[DC_DEEP]

I did, and it's just as non-dispositive as when you said it the first time.

Hint: consider the ways in which we "know" things.

Number 51, are you a chemist? Antimony has ALWAYS been one of my favorites! Now, instead of your stibnum, how about showing us your "cobalt-carbon-potassium"?

 

[SpeedoGuy]

Its curious that the crowd who labels Darwinian evolution "junk science" wants to teach public school kids that the dinosaurs died because there was no room for them on Noah's ark.