Thread: Split from Palin for VP: Creationism in schools

Originally Posted by kelbro

Too late to say hmmmmmm. Too late to change. Too late to tell anyone. Just plain too late

clarify, please. i don't understand what you are saying.

I think he's saying that it will be too late to base your life on the truth if you don't discover it before you die. But of course, if you can't discover it anyway (you're dead now) then it doesn't really matter

Originally Posted by Russel Baldridge

Wirebeard,

I didn't intend to insult you if it came across that way, and apologize for any harshness I may have conveyed.

No insult taken, I just offered up the site as an interesting alternative view. I think science and religion should be taught in schools - not a indoctrination, but as part of the human experience. Imagine how different things would be if everyone had a basic understanding of the world's belief systems.

My concern is Creationism being taught as an absolute truth...I have never heard it referred to as the "theory" of Creationism. As I said, the zealots want it only their way....and anything else marginalized.

Both views should be taught in classes appropriate to their origins, Science and Comparative Religion.

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

I think he's saying that it will be too late to base your life on the truth if you don't discover it before you die. But of course, if you can't discover it anyway (you're dead now) then it doesn't really matter

1. assuming ID is correct, it is demonstrably undiscoverable.
2. assuming evolution is correct (in some form) then the current theory just needs refining, and not knowing all the details in unimportant.
3. either way, the "truth" (which can never be known as such, see my previous comments concerning repetition) about how we came to be here has little to no bearing, imho, on our current lives.

Wirebeard, part of the problem is that scientific theory doesn't have to be absolutely true and accurate in order to still be useful and practical. Creationism has very little value at all if it there is no Creator. The determination of its validity needs to be made if it is going to be taught as a useful scientific basis. It can't really be tested and refined and retested, it's too black and white. Either there is a Creator or there isn't.

Am I wrong to think that publicly funded schools should make a religious determination before they could make a decision on whether or not to present Creationism in schools? Something about that doesn't taste right (dirty sock flavor)

Originally Posted by jockeys

the "truth" (which can never be known as such, see my previous comments concerning repetition) about how we came to be here has little to no bearing, imho, on our current lives.

Is it your opinion or is it a fact?

Using science as the standard by which to judge whether something should be included in a classroom would then also exclude such things as art and philosophy...

Originally Posted by Seraphim

Using science as the standard by which to judge whether something should be included in a classroom would then also exclude such things as art and philosophy...

art and philosophy aren't usually "taught as a useful scientific basis"...

Question:

Just because we don't believe in God (or whatever name you choose) does that really mean he doesn't exist?
Just because we don't believe in evolution as laid out by Darwin does that mean that it could not of happened that way?
I mean, do things as they exist really need us to recognize that they exist to...well...exist?

if a tree falls in the forest... noooooo

I guess my last question would be:

Just because you believe that something happened in a certain way does your belief make it so?

I guess all I am trying to say is that things are what they are no matter what we believe, no matter what science says, and no matter what religion says!