|
Equal time for creationism bill introduced
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Illusion |
See now this is what happenes when people keep marrying their own cusins. They end up producing offspring like Senator Gary Jackson and it's just not right!
"A bill calling for "balanced treatment to the theory of scientific creationism and the theory of evolution" was introduced in the Mississippi Senate and referred to the Committee on Education on January 10, 2005. Introduced by Senator Gary Jackson, who represents the 15th Senate District, SB 2286 defines "scientific creationism" as "the belief, based on scientific principles, that there was a time in the past when all matter, energy and life, and their processes and relationships, were created ex nihilo and fixed by creative and intelligent design," and would, if enacted, require "instruction in scientific theories of both evolution and scientific creationism if public schools choose to teach either." Only K-12 instruction would be affected by the bill. In both its title and in particular choices of phrasing, SB 2286 seems to be modeled on Lousiana's "Balanced Treatment for Creation-Science and Evolution-Science in Public School Instruction," which was held to be unconstitutional in the Supreme Court's 1987 decision in Edwards v. Aguillard."
 |
|
|
| Lateralus |
| Seems fair enough to me i guess, but only so long as they teach other religions along with christianity :whip: |
|
|
| Zild |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lateralus
Seems fair enough to me i guess, but only so long as they teach other religions along with christianity :whip: |
They better include neo-paganism too. |
|
|
| Dervish |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zild
They better include neo-paganism too. |
Exactly, just a farce really. If it's ment to be non-denomiational then it'll have to be based upon fact rather than belifs..... that'll be science then? |
|
|
| Zild |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dervish
Exactly, just a farce really. If it's ment to be non-denomiational then it'll have to be based upon fact rather than belifs..... that'll be science then? |
That was my point. I do at points consider myself a neo-pagan but I don't need children's science classes to propogate my beliefs. |
|
|
| Dj Tomer |
| Where's TranceVanDyk? He could teach a couple of Creationism courses. |
|
|
| zig |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dj Tomer
Where's TranceVanDyk? He could teach a couple of Creationism courses. |
I think he felt the athiests were bullys...bring him back i say... |
|
|
| ::TranceVanDyk:: |
bravo for Mississippi.
| quote: | | Seems fair enough to me i guess, but only so long as they teach other religions along with christianity |
philosophically speaking, we all have a religion, i really dont want to whip out the dictionary and find the definition of religion, because the word religion doesnt always mean the belief of a deity. im assuming your religion to be Secular Humanism. what right does secular humanism have in public school's over other religions? what makes secular humanism "true"? What is truth? what is "right", and what is "wrong"?
i think your statement is hypocracy because if secular humanism is taught in school's, other religions should be too, whether u agree with them or not.
i kinda stayed away from the religious debates, because the creation-evolution discussion became soooo looonnnggg and drawn out, i no longer had the time. concerning creation in this thread, ide rather not get into it, but search for "What if Christianity and Islam were combined?" by Lira. go to around page 9, i think, around there, and youll see my arguement for creationism, and the arguements for evolution.:) :) :) |
|
|
| Dj Tomer |
| The only real problem I have with this is that they probably have to sacrifice time from teaching real science to incorporate this stuff now. Meaning that kids are learning less real science and more of this nonsense. |
|
|
| zig |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dj Tomer
The only real problem I have with this is that they probably have to sacrifice time from teaching real science to incorporate this stuff now. Meaning that kids are learning less real science and more of this nonsense. |
But its not considered nonsense...by people that believe..and i guess they have a point as well.. |
|
|
| ::TranceVanDyk:: |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dj Tomer
The only real problem I have with this is that they probably have to sacrifice time from teaching real science to incorporate this stuff now. Meaning that kids are learning less real science and more of this nonsense. |
but what if what's being taught IS NOT TRUE!!?? evolution can never be proved without a doubt, and there are very strong arguements against it that have not been substantially answered. lets not get into a debate over the specific arguements, but why not teach the different theories, and let the students decide for themselves what they regard as the best theory, and what they will believe. people complain about christianity shoving it's doctrine down people's throat, when evolutionists and seculars, do the exact same thing.
this issue is part of a much bigger issue. it's a spiritual/doctrinal/religious battle that's going on, and this is part of it. who is ultimately going to win. i know without a doubt. moslims are battling, christians are battling, seculars, evolutionists are battling, armies are battling, music is being fought over, and the classroom is being fought over. everything is being fought over. hopefully, people can grasp this. |
|
|
| DrUg_Tit0 |
| quote: | Originally posted by ::TranceVanDyk::
bravo for Mississippi. |
Bravo for what? Attempting to give equal time to science and religion in a science classroom? I don't see people demanding evolution to be taught in sunday school.
| quote: | | philosophically speaking, we all have a religion, i really dont want to whip out the dictionary and find the definition of religion, because the word religion doesnt always mean the belief of a deity. im assuming your religion to be Secular Humanism. what right does secular humanism have in public school's over other religions? what makes secular humanism "true"? What is truth? what is "right", and what is "wrong"? |
That is simply not correct. Religion does require a belief in either a deity or at least in some sort of spiritualism, but the key word here is belief. Now, while you could say that strict atheism and religion do share the fact that they both believe in something, secularism is basically the same as agnosticism and therefore does not believe in anything. Hence it can not be regarded as a religious or even a belief system, and therefore it has more right to be taught in schools not because it teaches people what is right or wrong, but because it teaches people only about things which are observable and of which we are pertty much certain of. Every other religion and belief system including atheism includes in itself things that are not observable and that only a result of one's personal believs and ideals.[/quote]
| quote: | | i think your statement is hypocracy because if secular humanism is taught in school's, other religions should be too, whether u agree with them or not. |
Again, secular humanism is not a religon, but really, if you teach every religion in the world, you'd finish your schooling at the age of 50. But what you are demanding here is grossly unfair. You want public secular schools to teach your religion, yet you do not want your specific church to teach secular values. Getting yourself catholic education is not forbidden in the US, and if you want to learn about creationism (which is dismissed even by the pope himself), you can go to your local church. But you shouldn't force your religious values upon anybody, because scientists are not forcing your church to teach evolution.
| quote: | | i kinda stayed away from the religious debates, because the creation-evolution discussion became soooo looonnnggg and drawn out, i no longer had the time. concerning creation in this thread, ide rather not get into it, but search for "What if Christianity and Islam were combined?" by Lira. go to around page 9, i think, around there, and youll see my arguement for creationism, and the arguements for evolution.:) :) :) |
Well, ultimately it must come to this because the only reason why evolution is being taught in schools instead of creationism is that it has much more evidence on its side. |
|
|
|
|
