61
   

Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

 
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Fri 25 Nov, 2011 02:52 pm
@reasoning logic,
Well--that's no good rl. I'm a bloody atheist. I'm pissed off at all these Christians pretending to be atheists and giving us a bad name.

The first thing I thought on reading that Dr Murray had 7 offshoots got out of 5 females was how proud Professor Dawkins would be of him.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Nov, 2011 03:14 pm
@spendius,
I am a Christian Atheist.

Do you think we need more people like this?

spendius
 
  0  
Reply Fri 25 Nov, 2011 03:58 pm
Just what was it exactly that you guys thought the Senator wande quoted meant by saying that there are "controversial issues" involved in this topic.

I suppose you contented yourselves with thinking that he was talking out of his arse which seems to be your bottom-line scientific principle.

And it isn't just the missionary position which is involved either. There is also the matter of how the parties to it meet. The social settings which lead to it. Religious theology is only a mask for the secular theology which it answers to.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Fri 25 Nov, 2011 04:08 pm
@reasoning logic,
Quote:
Do you think we need more people like this?


No. Protestants are absurd anyway.

I would guess he's a follower of Baruch Spinoza.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Nov, 2011 04:30 pm
@spendius,
All joking aside I do agree with you about needing a church or something to lead us morally in the right direction the only problem I have with the bible is that it is 2,000 years old in its newest writings. I think that the bible has some great ethics but it also has psychopathic teachings as well.

It seems that there have been ethically enlightened people for a very long time but their teachings have been suppressed by the majority [The psychopaths]


We need a leader who will speak like this preacher. I don't believe every thing he does but it is a more advanced place than where many of us are now.

cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Nov, 2011 05:11 pm
@reasoning logic,
I disagree; we don't need any religion to teach us morals. It's the parent's responsibility to teach their children right from wrong. Religion have been responsible for many of human tragedies and atrocities; there's no lesson to be learned from "organized" anything. It's also the failure of our educational system when they fail to teach students honesty and ethics along with business and other courses that requires it.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Nov, 2011 05:20 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
It's also the failure of our educational system when they fail to teach students honesty and ethics along with business and other courses that requires it.


I thought you said [there's no lesson to be learned from "organized" anything.]

You are also purposing it be taught. Sad to say not all of our parents are bright enough to know right from wrong on some issue.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Nov, 2011 05:36 pm
@reasoning logic,
You took my post too literally; there are exceptions to almost everything humans do regarding the issue of morals. Show me any other "organization" that purports to be good examples of morals? Our educational system was not established to teach morals; they were established to educate the masses to read, write, and learn math.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Nov, 2011 05:45 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I think we should learn ethics in school using the most advanced understandings that the scientific community can come up with.
Ethics do need to have a place in our education system the difference between it and religion is that it will be open to a better understanding when one is shown where as religion so far has been absolute and can not be wrong. At least they do not think so.
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Fri 25 Nov, 2011 05:49 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
they were established to educate the masses to read, write, and learn math.


None of that means anything. What does read, write and learn arithmetic actually mean? Forget mathematics. That's gone way beyond the masses. To contemplate you going from 5 to 18 in schools is mind boggling.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Fri 25 Nov, 2011 06:06 pm
@reasoning logic,
Quote:
I think we should learn ethics in school using the most advanced understandings that the scientific community can come up with.


With what objective in view? The objective of meeting with your approval rl is a bit risky to say the least.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Nov, 2011 06:12 pm
@spendius,
I do not know what you mean. I do not see where there would be a problem being I would be the one building the scientific community.

Sam Harris, Patrica Churchland, David Eagleman and the list goes on.....
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2011 03:58 am
@reasoning logic,
That's okay if you and your admired ones are self sufficient. Do any of you grow food or generate electricity or fix the roads?
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2011 04:01 am
@spendius,
Quote:
Do any of you grow food or generate electricity or fix the roads?



Those will be jobs given to theist.
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Nov, 2011 11:49 am
Quote:
Rick Santorum Urges Teaching Of Creationism In Public Schools
(Huffington Post, November 30, 2011)

Former Pennsylvania Sen. and GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum says the "left" and "scientific community" have monopolized the public school system's curriculum, only permitting the teaching of evolution and leaving no room for the introduction of creation-based theories in the classroom.

"There are many on the left and in the scientific community, so to speak, who are afraid of that discussion because oh my goodness you might mention the word, God-forbid, 'God' in the classroom, or 'Creator,' that there may be some things that are inexplainable by nature where there may be, where it's actually better explained by a Creator, and of course we can't have that discussion," Santorum said in an editorial interview with the Nashua Telegraph. "It's very interesting that you have a situation where science will only allow things in the classroom that are consistent with a non-Creator idea of how we got here, as if somehow or another that's scientific. Well maybe the science points to the fact that maybe science doesn't explain all these things. And if it does point to that, then why don't you pursue that? But you can't, because it's not science, but if science is pointing you there how can you say it's not science? It's worth the debate."

Santorum has long expressed frustration with -- and tried to combat -- the whole "science only allows science to be taught in science class" scenario. He attempted to append the self-titled "Santorum Amendment" to the No Child Left Behind Act back when he was a senator in 2001. The amendment, which failed, served the dual purposes of promoting the inclusion of intelligent design teachings in classrooms, while simultaneously undercutting the academic merits of evolution.

Intelligent design, the teaching of which was ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge in 2005, has been pushed by proponents as a "scientific" alternative to evolution that includes a Creator. Critics however, claim that there is simply no scientific evidence to back this theory, and that attempts to get it in the classroom are moves by the religious community to legitimize creationism as a substitute for evolution.

Though Santorum is a social conservative Catholic and well-documented opponent of evolution, when pressed repeatedly by MSNBC host Chris Matthews earlier this year on whether he believed in evolution, Santorum said he did -- in a "micro sense."
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Nov, 2011 01:10 pm
@wandeljw,
He talks like a micro-candidate. Beyond teaching creationism as a course, what follows that? Once upon a time, there was a god created by man....
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Nov, 2011 01:17 pm
@reasoning logic,
Quote:
Those will be jobs given to theist. (s).


Well they know that rl. Peasants is peasants and city-slickers is city-slickers. It's not slick being useful is it? (see Thorstein Veblen for comprehensive scientific explanation).

Nice of you to be honest about it I must say.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Nov, 2011 01:26 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Beyond teaching creationism as a course, what follows that?


Oh---art...fancy....creativity....expansion....pubs....seaside girls....bells ringing. The usual.

Look how the Soviets shrank. And China now allows 5 major religions to practice openly.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Nov, 2011 01:30 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

Look how the Soviets shrank. And China now allows 5 major religions to practice openly.


Funny you mention that, on another thread I was just commenting on RL's Stalinistic need to dictate what everyone else thinks.
0 Replies
 
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Nov, 2011 01:34 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
Nice of you to be honest about it I must say.


Spendius I do think you know me better than that.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 07/08/2025 at 10:14:29