Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Morning Tech Bits

View
29 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

29. Re: No subject May 3, 2005, 21:15 anon@24.76
 
but you cant just teach made up stuff in science. If you go down that road how long till scientologists get equal time to teach kids about theatons and clearity?


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
28. Re: No subject May 3, 2005, 20:36 Tango
 
I can't speak for everyone else, but I only have a problem with the ones who demand everybody else conform to their own personal belief system.
Bingo. The problem is when (almost) everyone in the area believes as they do. Is there any sense in teaching kids in certain parts evolution as fact in schools (as their parents and church will teach otherwise). While the sensible solution is so blindingly obvious (teach what we can best prove - evolution), the liberal solution (teach what each jurisdiction believes) is just as attractive in other areas.

Meh, I hate being on the fence. Ideal world - teach both. Call one science, call the other religion. Hope the kids are smart enough to make their own minds up*

* this doesn't mean "fall in and belive in evolution" or "fall in and believe in Creationism." You can be as aethist as you want, but to avoid being a moron you must allow people to make their own decision here.

 
Avatar 18712
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
27. Re: No subject May 3, 2005, 16:53 anon@24.76
 
Creston: "5 billion people believe in God" is debatable, but it sure as hell is NOT debadtable that they dont all believe in the SAME god or the same creation fantasy.
Infact I would bet that large factions of that 5 billion actually find the creation fanstasys of the other large factions more offensive and crazy then they do evolution.

And creston, what is your plan? like split up all the schools into tiny fractionated crazy religion schools?

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26. No subject May 3, 2005, 14:32 Ratty
 
I don't think Bush ever said that it should be taught in science classes, but that it should be taught IN SCHOOL
That's a good point. Personally, I think we all know what he means, but you definitely have me on a technicality there.

I mostly stay out of the religion being taught in school debate in general. It can sound perfectly reasonable on paper but we all know what they're really after, and there is always an agenda behind their perfectly reasonable arguments. You can bet that those school boards that are pressing for religious education would not tolerate a critical view of the subject specifically in regards to Christianity. The teachers would certainly be hand-picked to conform to a fundamentalist protestant dogma, and although they may pay lip service to other religions for legal or constitutional reasons, you can bet your last dime their treatment of, say, Islam, would not be as kindly as their treatment of fundamentalist Protestant Christianity. How would they treat Catholicism, or Mormonism? How would Jehovah's Witnesses fare in their curricula on Christianity?

I just love how all the anti-religious on this board always proclaim to be so democratic and tolerant, but when it comes to people who choose to believe something different, they are nuts
I can't speak for everyone else, but I only have a problem with the ones who demand everybody else conform to their own personal belief system.

 
Avatar 22908
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: No subject May 3, 2005, 14:26 Ratty
 
It's Hindu, not "Hindo." Just thought I would clear that up - wouldn't want you to piss off a billion people with that mis-spelling
Seeing as how they probably spell the word in an entirely different alphabet, Devanagari usually, I'm sure they don't particularly care how we transliterate it into the Latin alphabet. But ultimately I defer to the user with "Gandhi" as his nick!

 
Avatar 22908
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: No subject May 3, 2005, 11:13 Gandhi
 
Well, if you piss them off then they're not following the teachings of Hinduism (or Hindoism ) very well now are they?

Getting angry at someone, and acting violently on that anger are two very different things

You cannot make anything fool-proof. The fools are too inventive
 
Avatar 11944
 
You cannot make anything fool-proof. The fools are too inventive

GW: Tr Gandhi (Ra), Shiva Sung (Mo), Mangal Pandey (Ne), Rana Pratap Singh (Wa), Boddhi Satwa (Ri), Bhagat Singh (De), Bahadur Shastri (Pa)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: No subject May 3, 2005, 10:34 Zathrus
 
wouldn't want you to piss off a billion people with that mis-spelling

Well, if you piss them off then they're not following the teachings of Hinduism (or Hindoism ) very well now are they?

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: No subject May 3, 2005, 10:30 Gandhi
 
Islam?
Hindo?
Scientology?

It's Hindu, not "Hindo." Just thought I would clear that up - wouldn't want you to piss off a billion people with that mis-spelling

You cannot make anything fool-proof. The fools are too inventive
 
Avatar 11944
 
You cannot make anything fool-proof. The fools are too inventive

GW: Tr Gandhi (Ra), Shiva Sung (Mo), Mangal Pandey (Ne), Rana Pratap Singh (Wa), Boddhi Satwa (Ri), Bhagat Singh (De), Bahadur Shastri (Pa)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: No subject May 3, 2005, 10:01 Zathrus
 
There are different schools, so they can teach different things.

I don't think you understand the public education system in the US. At all.

If you are REALLY democratic, as you claim to be

Who claims that? I certainly don't. We're a republic, not a democracy. Thankfully. Majority rule is the equivalent of mob rule.

I think that the reason schools right now do NOT offer such a class is because Creation is taught in science (or perhaps another class, I'm not 100% sure how the school system here works with regards to creation vs evolution)

And it shouldn't be taught in science (which we both agree on), because it's not science. It's not even vaguely close to science.

However, all of you who are on the "There should be NO creation taught in school, JUST evolution!" are just as bad as the "There should be no evolution, JUST Creation!" Christians whom you call extremists and nuts etc.

So where do you draw the line then? What other widely held beliefs are you going to teach, regardless of whether or not they have a scientific basis or are in direct opposition to science?

And note -- I'm not going to discount God or His involvement in the creation of the universe. I don't believe in it personally, but it is absolutely impossible to prove what came before the universe or what occurred to cause the big bang. There are theories, but they're all unprovable and as such aren't any better than the belief that a Divine being caused it. But that's not what the creationists are asking to be taught. Not in the slightest.

Besides our normal schools, we have schools for Arab people, we have schools (not very many) that predominantly teach asian studies etc

We don't. Not public schools at least. There's this whole issue of "separate but equal" that's been demonstratably false. Some districts do have focused schools, but they're focused on science, or math, or the arts, or languages -- not on particular ethnicities or cultures. And none of them are run by religious groups because that's seen as a violation of the 1st Amendment -- it's viewed as supporting a particular religion which is not allowed.

I just love how all the anti-religious on this board always proclaim to be so democratic and tolerant, but when it comes to people who choose to believe something different, they are nuts, extremists

Sigh. There are some nutjobs on both sides -- the vast majority of people do not fall into that category though. On either side. I do not have any problem with your beliefs, nor with any of my numerous friends (and wife) who believe either.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20. No subject May 3, 2005, 09:05 Creston
 
well creston what other fairy tales should they teach in addition to creationism?
Islam?
Hindo?
Scientology?

There is a limited amount of time for school, so if you start teaching fantasy, in a non-creative-writing setting, then you have to start cutting other stuff.


There are different schools, so they can teach different things. And it's fantasy to you, the majority on the planet does not agree with you (5 billion people believe in God, or some form of God, I think? That seems like a nice majority to me. Let's just keep it in the US. How many people here are Christian or some form of Christian denomination?)
If you are REALLY democratic, as you claim to be, you would accept that, and accept that a number of people prefer to be taught different things. But then again, if people don't believe as YOU do, they really just need to shut the fuck up, right?

Because it has more to do with religion than science. Therefore if it needs to be taught in school at all, it needs to be taught as part of a class on religion, and NOT a class on evolution. Science = facts, religion = beliefs. Period.

Hey, guess what. That's EXACTLY what I said. Thanks for repeating my words.

Ok. So what class should it be taught in? Last I checked most schools do not offer a Comparative Theology class. Can you imagine how apeshit the Conservative Christians would go over that one?

I think that the reason schools right now do NOT offer such a class is because Creation is taught in science (or perhaps another class, I'm not 100% sure how the school system here works with regards to creation vs evolution). And yes, I'm sure there would be people who would not like it. What, am I suddenly responsible for the opinion of every Christian on the planet or something?
In MY opinion, a school can easily teach both things. However, all of you who are on the "There should be NO creation taught in school, JUST evolution!" are just as bad as the "There should be no evolution, JUST Creation!" Christians whom you call extremists and nuts etc.
You're just sitting on the other side of the fence. But I guess you don't see that, huh?

And which creationist story should be taught? Judeo-Christian-Islamic? Hindu? Ancient Greek/Roman? Egyptian?

Gee, this always seems to be really difficult for people to comprehend. Let's see. Besides our normal schools, we have schools for Arab people, we have schools (not very many) that predominantly teach asian studies etc. So... how about... if we teach Confusionist in the asian schools, the Koran / Islam in the Arab schools, and Christianity in the plain bog standard schools? (since, you know, it's only the number one religion here in the US and all).
And then have schools that teach no Creation, and have schools that teach only Creation.
Now, obviously, through the public school system, this would never get done, because it costs too much money, and the schools are already approximately 200 billion dollars short. So, in public schools, in my opinion, you can teach both.
And if someone doesn't like that, and wants a different education for his or her child, put that child in a private school.
And if they have no money for that, well then I'm truly sorry, but then you'll either have to get a second job, or accept that your kid will get taught whatever is taught in your local school system. Or keep it at home and teach it yourself.

This (having both taught in public schools) is done in several countries in Europe, and it WORKS PERFECTLY. I went to a Reformed school in Holland, and I didn't really adhere to the teaching there. But I got taught evolution, and there was a "Religions" class (kinda loosely translated).
If I WANTED to, I could choose to take extra classes in it, although, no, I could not take extra classes in Hindu and Devil worship. Holland is predominantly Roman Catholic vs Reformed, so that was all they offered. Plenty of Arab schools to go around if anyone wants to learn about the Koran though.
Seems a perfectly simple solution, no? So I went to a Reformed schoo, and if I wanted to, I could go to a Catholic school, or just a plain No Religion school, and several other choices.

Obviously, this works better in large cities than in rural areas, but then again, it's not the people in rural areas here in the US that are complaining anyways.

If you don't believe, shrug, I have no problem with that, it's your choice. I just love how all the anti-religious on this board always proclaim to be so democratic and tolerant, but when it comes to people who choose to believe something different, they are nuts, extremists, should shut the fuck up, should leave the country etc etc. Nice democratic and tolerant feelings you got there, guys.

Ah, hypocrisy. It's still our greatest asset.

Creston

This comment was edited on May 3, 09:10.
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
19. Re: No subject May 3, 2005, 08:37 Zathrus
 
I fail to see why everyone always gets so hard up against it being taught in school period.

Ok. So what class should it be taught in? Last I checked most schools do not offer a Comparative Theology class. Can you imagine how apeshit the Conservative Christians would go over that one?

And which creationist story should be taught? Judeo-Christian-Islamic? Hindu? Ancient Greek/Roman? Egyptian?

The US seems to be the only industrialized country that is struggling with this question. All the others simply teach evolution. Why is this?

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
18. Re: No subject May 3, 2005, 05:23 Awesome Spume
 
How do Christians reconcile being anti-gay (old testament), pro death penalty (old testament) and pro war (best bits of the old testament) while ignoring all the new testament hippiness about loving thy neightbour and turning the other cheek? Why does nobody ever pull these people on that when they stand up and claim to be Christians?

I read the Hutch article and he's not a big fan of same sex marriage. Neither am I but I'm not a big fan of marriage in general. So if the breeders are allowed to marry so should the gays, in fact I think we should have platonic marriage as well so everyone can wring the most monetary advantage from the deal. That'd be fair.

Suppose you're a confirmed bachelor (or a bitter woman hater like me) with tax, pension and property benefits slipping through your fingers because you're not married. Somewhere else in town is a semi-mad spinster (women as a rule are all mad, it's only a question of degree) who thinks a man would only come between her and her cats. They sign some papers have a bit of a ceremony, invite their friends to a piss up and voila they've just joined the benefits club.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
17. Re: No subject May 3, 2005, 02:38 Camaro76
 
but I fail to see why everyone always gets so hard up against it being taught in school period

Because it has more to do with religion than science. Therefore if it needs to be taught in school at all, it needs to be taught as part of a class on religion, and NOT a class on evolution. Science = facts, religion = beliefs. Period.

---------------------------------------------------
[No pixels were harmed in the making of this post.]
 
--------
BOOBIES Filter Greasemonkey script:
http://camaro76.web.aplus.net/BOOBIES_filter.user.js
Punk Buster (Ignore Trolls) Greasemonkey script:
http://camaro76.web.aplus.net/punkbuster.user.js
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16. Re: No subject May 3, 2005, 01:37 anon@24.76
 
well creston what other fairy tales should they teach in addition to creationism?
Islam?
Hindo?
Scientology?

There is a limited amount of time for school, so if you start teaching fantasy, in a non-creative-writing setting, then you have to start cutting other stuff.


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. Re: No subject May 2, 2005, 20:46 Creston
 
George Bush, for example, has never vehemently opposed evolution but has stated on a number of occasions that "alternatives" should be taught in science classes

I don't think Bush ever said that it should be taught in science classes, but that it should be taught IN SCHOOL.
There's a pretty big difference there. I will agree that Creation shouldn't be in science class (although plenty of astronomers and scientists will actually disagree there), but I fail to see why everyone always gets so hard up against it being taught in school period.
Apparently the freedom of choice and democracy are only valid for people if they think the same way you all do, right?

Creston


 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14. Re: No subject May 2, 2005, 20:29 SmyTTor
 
Hehe... look at the recent study about what teens who take abstinence pledges do =)

Can catch a bit of it on HBO's Bill Maher show.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
13. Re: No subject May 2, 2005, 18:33 Prez
 
because keeping people clueless about sex and saying "abstinence" is clearly the Right Thing to do.

Yeah my wife's a proponent of that policy...


 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
12. Re: No subject May 2, 2005, 16:26 Zathrus
 
This alternative science thing could really catch on big.

I'm still waiting for one of these fools to propose an alternative to the theory of gravity. After all, we know that it's wrong. Provably. It's just that we haven't yet come up with a better solution yet... damn those quantum physicists!

the best way of dealing with mental illness is with a good burning at the stake

No, no... it's clearly caused by pressure on the brain, which is best relieved via a drill. The old ways are the best you know!

And then there's the sex ed classes...

They've already beat you there... because keeping people clueless about sex and saying "abstinence" is clearly the Right Thing to do.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
11. Re: No subject May 2, 2005, 16:25 Grasman
 
I'm hoping that the Canadian politicians will demonstrate some independence and intelligence on this issue.

They won’t.

American money from the RIAA will exchange nicely into Canadian money.

Canada actually has stricter controls on the bribing donations for MPs. Donations can only be given during an election and the maximum amount anyone can give is relatively small. As well, the Commission of Ethics has power to monitor MPs, up to checking on their bank accounts. This doesnt stop the RIAA from paying persuasive lobbyists but it does limit the ways in which they can use their money make legislation. I think the sponsorship scandal is enough to remind any Canadian that our politicians are as capable of being corrupt as any.

That said, a lot of Canadians are still unhappy with the US and any wiff that our laws are being dictated to us from the south will not go over well. Canadian Prime Ministers have had an independent streak as of late, hope it continues.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10. Re: No subject May 2, 2005, 16:04 Syntarsus
 
George Bush, for example, has never vehemently opposed evolution but has stated on a number of occasions that "alternatives" should be taught in science classes.

This alternative science thing could really catch on big.

I can't wait for the astronomy classes that teach us the sunrise/sunset is not caused by planetary rotation, but by Helios pulling his sun chariot across the sky. I also eagerly anticipate the alternative medical classes, which instruct the best way of dealing with mental illness is with a good burning at the stake. And then there's the sex ed classes...

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
29 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo