22
   

Sarah Palin wants creationism taught in science classes

 
 
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 03:46 am
McCain's VP Wants Creationism Taught in School

Quote:
In a 2006 gubernatorial debate, the soon-to-be governor of Alaska said of evolution and creation education, "Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of education. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both."


This canard that gives creationism parity with evolution is absurd. If people want creationism taught in science class it should be taught that it is an example of religious fundamentalism that fails on all counts as a scientific theory.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 22 • Views: 10,275 • Replies: 95

 
mysteryman
 
  2  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 06:33 am
@Robert Gentel,
So then as long as they add the disclaimer you propose, you also have no problem with creationism being taught in science classes.

edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 06:38 am
@mysteryman,
He did not say he approves, but that others do.

0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  4  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 08:02 am
@Robert Gentel,
Quote:
McCain's VP Wants Creationism Taught in School

I wondered if maybe this one of the reasons she was picked. Are there enough "Creationist" votes out there to make a difference?

Obviously Creationism should not be taught in science class. Not only is it not science, but it conflicts with our constitution. The top office in the country is supposed to protect and defend the constitution, not dismantle it and kick it aside. Attacking the constitution is the same as attacking the United States itself.

Trying to put Creationism into school is a very "Bushy" thing to do, and I thought McCain wanted to distance himself from that.

mysteryman
 
  3  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 08:05 am
@rosborne979,
OK, I'll bite.

How does teaching a theory conflict with our Constitution and how is it the same as "attacking the United States itself."?

While I dont agree that creationism should be taught in a science class, I would have no problem with it being discussed in a philosophy class, or in any other class that deals with reasoning and thinking.
rosborne979
 
  3  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 08:11 am
@mysteryman,
I only said science class. If you want to teach it in comparative religion class that's fine.

But honestly you're missing the point if you think that all these people want is to introduce a comparative religion class. We already have those. What they want is to put the bible back into school and to give it equal status with science. And that conflicts with the first amendment. And intentionally trying to bypass the first amendment is trampling on the constitution and that's an attack on the foundational ideas of the US.

0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 08:14 am
@mysteryman,
As I read it he is saying, (as I think you perfectly well understand), that if it enters the science classroom at all, it should be only as a perfect exemplar of what ISN'T science, but makes laughable claims to be so...so that students may better comprehend what science IS so that they may better recognize all such travesties of science.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 08:40 am
I have no problem with creationism being mentioned in schools along with the scientific explanation of creation... but please tell ALL the creation stories then and not just the Christian one. That'll prepare our youth to compete with China and other countries where children are being taught life skills all right.
0 Replies
 
Not a Soccer Mom
 
  0  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 09:36 am
Why don't we teach alien abduction theories in schools?
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  8  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 09:44 am
@Robert Gentel,
Creationism is not science and has no business in a classroom. Teach it at home or church if you must.
mysteryman
 
  0  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 11:37 am
@Lash,
Is literature science?
Is english composition science?
What about civics (govt)?
Are they science?

Are you actually saying that only science can be or should be taught in a classroom?
That would eliminate many subjects taught in schools today.
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 11:42 am
@mysteryman,
Uh, no. She's saying (and I agree) that you don't teach literature, composition, or civics in science class, so why would you teach religion?
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 11:44 am
@Lash,
This is really all that should need be said. Arguments for creationism in the class go in circles around this simple fact, but cannot alter it.
0 Replies
 
thegalacticemperor
 
  3  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 11:49 am
@mysteryman,
Of course, there is much outside the realm of science which should be taught in schools. Perhaps Creationism has a place in another classroom setting (Social Studies, Religious Studies, Anthropology, etc.) to illustrate diversity among belief systems but it certainly shouldn't be taught in a science classroom.
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 11:55 am
Democratic 2008 Platform on the subject...

Line 18-38 on page 19
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/Platform%208%207%2008%20(2).pdf

Science, Technology and Innovation

America has long led the world in innovation. But this Administration's hostility to science has taken a toll. At a time when technology helps shape our future, we devote a smaller and smaller share of our national resources to research and development.

It is time again to lead. We took a critical step with the America Competes Act and we will start by implementing that act "then we will do more. We will make science, technology, engineering, and math education a national priority. We will double federal funding for basic research, invest in a strong and inspirational vision for space exploration and make the Research and Development Tax Credit permanent. We will invest in the next generation of transformative energy technologies and health IT and we will renew the defense R&D system. We will lift the current Administration's ban on using federal funding for embryonic stem cells"cells that would have otherwise have been discarded and lost forever"for research that could save lives. We will ensure that our patent laws protect legitimate rights while not stifling innovation and creativity.

We will end the Bush Administration’s war on science, restore scientific integrity, and return to evidence-based decision-making.
In sum, we will strengthen our system, treat science and technology as crucial investments, and use these forces to ensure a future of economic leadership, health well being and national security.


0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 12:02 pm
science should be what is taught is science class. Creationism should be mentioned in a social science class maybe, but not a biological science class. It also should not be taught as if it is true or might be true, it should be taught as a myth that a certain number of people believe in.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  2  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 12:33 pm
@thegalacticemperor,
Quote:
Of course, there is much outside the realm of science which should be taught in schools. Perhaps Creationism has a place in another classroom setting (Social Studies, Religious Studies, Anthropology, etc.) to illustrate diversity among belief systems but it certainly shouldn't be taught in a science classroom
.

And if you read my posts, thats exactly what I have been saying about the subject.
Robert Gentel
 
  4  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 12:53 pm
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:

And if you read my posts, thats exactly what I have been saying about the subject.


So? You aren't a candidate for the White house and what you are saying about it is simply not the same as what the creationist Palin is saying about it.

She's saying we should teach "both" evolution and creation in science class on equal footing:

Quote:
Sarah Palin: “I support this plank in the Republican Party’s platform. I believe society can have healthy debates on scientific theories, so equal representation of creation and evolution shouldn’t be an offense.”


That's the nonsense I'm arguing against: the idiotic notion that creation is a scientific theory when it doesn't meet any of the criteria to be considered science and that it should be given equal representation in the science classroom.

I don't mind if it's taught in the "Stupid things people believe" class, but this is nothing of the sort. This is an attempt to treat creationism like a science.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 12:55 pm
@Robert Gentel,
I always want to ask people who think that creationism is a scientific theory: which part of that theory is testable? lol

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 01:10 pm
If we knew the answer, then what? Poof or pooooooooooooooooooooooof?
I'm still stuck on that 'chicken or egg' thing.
 

Related Topics

Creationism and public schools - Question by plainoldme
Is Evolution a Dangerous Idea? If so, why? - Discussion by edgarblythe
Creationism in schools - Question by MORALeducation
Fighting to end Creationism - Discussion by rosborne979
Evolution VS. Creationism - Discussion by Palatidd
Creator - Question by Ali phil
A question about intelligent design - Discussion by Cyracuz
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Sarah Palin wants creationism taught in science classes
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/12/2019 at 08:26:39