Ok I really don't want to use the majority argument, but john all of europe teaches evoltion, th entire western world teaches evoltuion there must be a reason for it? Maybe because of the evidence for it? This is reminding me of the treatment of Galileo when hes aid the earth revolved around the sun.
or maybe b/c they are marxist sympathizers looking for any theory that will back up his materialistic atheistic view of the world. I could be way off. Just a guess on my part.
Churches are in the business of teaching religion not schools. The youth need to learn much more important things than that. Like for instance math, science, and English.
And John, I'm all for teaching about religions. My only issue has ever been that the truth of a religion shouldn't be an issue that a school or the government makes a comment on.
You, I suspect, want to include evolution as a religion. I'm sorry to say this, but it's not.
Evolution as a religion?! What? Where would you get that? No serious debate amongst scientists about evolution? Of course there is, but regardless, how many different ways do I have to say I don't want religion taught in the manner of 'promoting' religion?
This is very presumptious and would be very convenient for you if it were true. Also, you are familiar with the entire scientific community and their specific opinions on this?
You are quite the social butterfly then. Of course, this is not the case. This is a gross generalization if you can even call it that, probably closer to huge assumption and at worst wishful thinking.
There is no debate in the scientific community. The only serious debate is political...should the government let something that isn't scientific into a science class.
Again, I'm all for teaching ID. But it shouldn't go in a science class any more than astrology should.
I agree, the controversy about evolution in the scientific community is non-existant, and is just a fabrication (at least i belive) made by fundamentalist christians.
You were doing so good until you got to the part about science class.
The difference is that there are serious debates amongst historians about the "christian nation" question. There is no serious debate amongst scientists about evolution.
Not saying that the ID vs. Evolution debate shouldn't be had, and had by students, but it shouldn't be in a science class. History of science, perhaps.
Ok I really don't want to use the majority argument, but john all of europe teaches evoltion, th entire western world teaches evoltuion there must be a reason for it? Maybe because of the evidence for it? This is reminding me of the treatment of Galileo when hes aid the earth revolved around the sun.
nazg55 4 years ago
or maybe b/c they are marxist sympathizers looking for any theory that will back up his materialistic atheistic view of the world. I could be way off. Just a guess on my part.
johnebii 4 years ago
Churches are in the business of teaching religion not schools. The youth need to learn much more important things than that. Like for instance math, science, and English.
dataloreforever 4 years ago
out students don't even learn that in public schools.
johnebii 4 years ago
That is my point schools need to be teaching the important things, and doing it well, without wasting their time on crap that does not matter.
dataloreforever 4 years ago
And John, I'm all for teaching about religions. My only issue has ever been that the truth of a religion shouldn't be an issue that a school or the government makes a comment on.
You, I suspect, want to include evolution as a religion. I'm sorry to say this, but it's not.
morsec0de 4 years ago
Evolution as a religion?! What? Where would you get that? No serious debate amongst scientists about evolution? Of course there is, but regardless, how many different ways do I have to say I don't want religion taught in the manner of 'promoting' religion?
johnebii 4 years ago
Actually there isn't. There's the scientific community, a handful of non-biological PhD's who disagree, and then a political engine.
morsec0de 4 years ago
That is your characterization of them morse.
This is very presumptious and would be very convenient for you if it were true. Also, you are familiar with the entire scientific community and their specific opinions on this?
You are quite the social butterfly then. Of course, this is not the case. This is a gross generalization if you can even call it that, probably closer to huge assumption and at worst wishful thinking.
johnebii 4 years ago
It is a generalization made about specifics.
There is no debate in the scientific community. The only serious debate is political...should the government let something that isn't scientific into a science class.
Again, I'm all for teaching ID. But it shouldn't go in a science class any more than astrology should.
morsec0de 4 years ago
I agree, the controversy about evolution in the scientific community is non-existant, and is just a fabrication (at least i belive) made by fundamentalist christians.
nazg55 4 years ago
is the kool-aid good?
johnebii 4 years ago
You were doing so good until you got to the part about science class.
The difference is that there are serious debates amongst historians about the "christian nation" question. There is no serious debate amongst scientists about evolution.
Not saying that the ID vs. Evolution debate shouldn't be had, and had by students, but it shouldn't be in a science class. History of science, perhaps.
morsec0de 4 years ago