Bush: Intelligent Design Should Be Taught

Hey Woiyo...be careful.

Yogi is a Jersey boy! He's allowed.

Frank Apisa wrote:

Hey Woiyo...be careful.

Yogi is a Jersey boy! He's allowed.

Actually born in St. Louis, but most well known in Jersey.

Have you visited his Museum?? Just as good a Cooperstown and Yankee Stadium itself IMO.

Brandon9000 wrote:

D'artagnan wrote:

The hair-splitting by some of the righties on this thread is amusing to watch. "Show me where he said we should teach intelligent design."

Speaking of intelligent design, I think we need some coming from the White House...

Yes, what you call hair-splitting, most other people call the conventional rules of debate. If you want to maintain that someone said something, yes, you actually have to produce a quotation from the person saying it. Oh, poor you, expected to adhere to the age old rules of honorable debate.

The quotation was cited repeatedly earlier in this thread. And I read the same quotation in the paper this morning. Does it need to be posted here again?

I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought," Bush said. "You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes.

The hair-splitting by some of the righties on this thread is amusing to watch. "Show me where he said we should teach intelligent design."

I'm curious as to why "intelligent design" merits presentation as a "different school of thought"? Because Bush's fundamentalist constituency demands it?

What if another subculture insisted that the sun revolves around the earth? Should that be taught as a "different school of thought"?

And they say liberal are relativists...

My previous post concerned what he DID say, Brandon. That students should be "exposed" to ID.

D'artagnan wrote:

My previous post concerned what he DID say, Brandon. That students should be "exposed" to ID.

Yes, and my previous post answered it. His use of the word "exposed" is not very specific.

Brandon9000 wrote:

D'artagnan wrote:

My previous post concerned what he DID say, Brandon. That students should be "exposed" to ID.

Yes, and my previous post answered it. His use of the word "exposed" is not very specific.

Well, with all due respect, that's what I meant earlier by "hair splitting."

If the teachers expose students to ID, then presumably they are meant to discuss it. On the one hand, one the other hand...That sort of thing.

Until he says that it should be presented in a science class on an equal footing with evolution, he cannot be justly accused of saying that. He might have meant that it should be given a two minute discussion in some non-science class.

Until he says that it should be presented in a science class on an equal footing with evolution, he cannot be justly accused of saying that. He might have meant that it should be given a two minute discussion in some non-science class.

Brandon9000 wrote:

Until he says that it should be presented in a science class on an equal footing with evolution, he cannot be justly accused of saying that. He might have meant that it should be given a two minute discussion in some non-science class.

Well...I was giving some credence to your arguments here, Brandon...but you may have gone a bit too far in that paragraph.

Bush did indicate he thought it should be considered alongside evolution theories....and that is not likely to be taught in non-science classes.

I realize any skilled debater...and I consider you to be one...could attack this comment. But the thrust of Bush's (non) remarks...although carefully worded so as to allow plenty of wiggle room...seems to indicate he sees it appropriate to intrude this stuff into a science based class.

Frank Apisa wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

Until he says that it should be presented in a science class on an equal footing with evolution, he cannot be justly accused of saying that. He might have meant that it should be given a two minute discussion in some non-science class.

Well...I was giving some credence to your arguments here, Brandon...but you may have gone a bit too far in that paragraph.

Bush did indicate he thought it should be considered alongside evolution theories....and that is not likely to be taught in non-science classes.

I realize any skilled debater...and I consider you to be one...could attack this comment. But the thrust of Bush's (non) remarks...although carefully worded so as to allow plenty of wiggle room...seems to indicate he sees it appropriate to intrude this stuff into a science based class.

If he didn't say it, he didn't say it. He said only what can be found in his quotation, that the kids should be exposed to different ideas. That is a very vague recommendation. We can't say for sure what he was advocating unless he says more.