Posted on 08/25/2008 4:20:50 AM PDT by Soliton
In June, Governor Brad Henry vetoed the “Religious Viewpoints Antidiscrimination Act,” a piece of legislature authored by Sen. James Williamson and infamous fundamentalist Rep. Sally Kern.
If passed, this bill would have, among other things, guaranteed that “students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions.”
You read that correctly.
Answer on a test that the universe began 6,000 years ago with a few words from the mouth of an invisible, magical entity rather than 13.73 billion years ago with the expansion of energy from gravitational singularity? A-plus!
So it might have been if Gov. Henry hadn’t interceded. I’d like to tell Henry: Thank you from the bottom of my heart, and God bless you.
And to those of you who weren’t kicking up a fuss about the bill or at least complaining about it on your blogs: What were you thinking?
This isn’t the first time Kern and those like her have tried to insinuate superstitious nonsense into the curriculum of our state’s children, and it certainly won’t be the last.
Some of you may be too busy to follow each shot fired in the battle between the proponents of intelligent design the nom de guerre behind which creationism usually hides when its proponents seek to incorporate it into educational curricula — and its detractors.
(Excerpt) Read more at oudaily.com ...
When you take the Socialist and Homosexual and Islamist and Abortionists agenda out of our schools then maybe you take a persons right to express their Fundamentalst viewpoint. Until then STFU.
The doctrine of the scriptures of God’s Christ does indeed belong in the public schools. The fallacy of no God leads people into sorrow and death.
May Christ smile upon you too! :)
When did all the churches go out of business?
[This isn’t the first time Kern and those like her have tried to insinuate superstitious nonsense into the curriculum of our state’s children,]
our state’s children,
a democrat or rino wrote this as they beleive the state and not the parents own children.
I think you are confused. It wasn't a political statement, but a scientific one. Why can't parents take their kids to church to learn about religion?
There is no scientific proof for evolution, as it is just a theory. When you think about the complexity of even the smallest of molecules, germs, etc., it is incredible to see design with intent. I’m sorry, but it takes a HUGE leap of faith to think that a huge explosion in space billions of years ago brought order out of chaos. In the real world, an explosion disrupts and brings chaos...which is what one expects, out of order.
The law does not even intend to exclude the teaching of eveolution...so what are they afraid of? A little truth exposing the LIE that the ungodly want to shove down our throats?
"The so-called 'terrorist attacks' of September 11 were a black operation of the BushCheneyCIAHalliburton cabal. Allah Akbar!"
That was so stupid a statement, I hesitated to respond. How did you learn to write without knowing how to read?
The sad thing about this "legislation" is the students already have the right to express their religious beliefs. The first admendment guarantees it. We don't don't need more legislation, we just need to stop the state/courts from usurping and abridging a right we already have!
This legislation wasn’t designed to allow kids to mention Jesus in an English paper, but to prevent them from losing points for putting nonsense in science papers.
With school choice, each parent can decide what is best for his or her child. Freedom!
Damn right too. I dunno why people want to take the easy way out to proselytyzation. If you want to spread the word, do it on your own time, not on my tax money.
In my town alone there must be ten large churches on Main Street. I think kids must be refusing to go to church and their parents are desperate so they try to turn public schools into churches.
And keep it there - behind Church walls, right?
This is the socialist manta of the Marxist left. They conveniently forget the other side of the mythical "separation-of-church-and-state" coin: "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." In public is where true religion is exercised.
Behold the jackass in its natural environment: the internet.
Education needs more parental decision. And junk science is proven to be a fairy tale. Just look at the old ‘Ice Age’ theory. Is it now safe to say that at least that theory was debunked?
I used to be a die-hard evolutionist until I read one of Ann Coulter’s books. If I recall it was, “How to Talk to a Liberal if You Must”. A real eye opener about evolutionism.
On the other side of the coin, the six of Genisis were not solar days. If one reads Page One carefully, one finds that the days of Genisis were beyond mortal comprehension at the time the Book was written. There was no sun on the first day. There was no manmade time piece of any kind either.
Conclusion: why not give the parents more say of what their kids are taught?
In fact if you wanted to be fair about it and let all sides be heard, Rastafari would lend itself quite well to certain kinds of team teaching situations; a bio teacher looking for a way to put 30 teenagers into the right frame of mind to be indoctrinated into something as idiotic as evolutionism could walk across the hall to the Rasta class for a box of spliffs....
The dialectic is between evolution and mathematics. Professing belief in evolution at this juncture amounts to the same thing as claiming not to believe in modern mathematics, probability theory, and logic. It's basically ignorant.
No, there are TV ministries, religious radio stations, direct mail, soap boxes on corners. They're okay by me and the Constitution. It is unconstitutional to teach Creationism in school and ID is just Creationism. Conservatives believe in the constitution.
That's quite an admission. I'm proud of you. Are you in some kind of 12 step program?
You win the cigar. Most asinine statement on FR to date!
You mean opposed to the nonsense which is already part of scientific theory? No fact, means opinion or belief, and that's exactly what you have with evolution. In fact, it's much more than just opinion, evolution has become a cult because of the egotistical, agenda driven side of science.
Yeah, the whole point of this bill must be intelligent design. It couldn’t be designed to prevent stuff like kids getting an F for turning in a homework assignment that mentions Jesus or anything. After all, that’s never happened in the whole history of public schooling...
Then there’s the fact that if intelligent design was half as stupid and dishonest as you guys say it is, any science teacher could demolish it on the first day of seventh grade science class.
Who's stopping parents teaching their kids? Besides go back and read Genesis again. Plants were created before the sun. A whole lot of plants must have died during that time.
Because that leads to a slippery slope! Parents can want anything at all taught! That there is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is his prophet? Some parents want that. That bacterial infection is gods punishment visited upon us, and we must pray to rid ourself of it? There is no end, once unproven ideas are turned into, forgive the word, gospel in our educational system.
“You win the cigar. Most asinine statement on FR to date!”
Supreme Court ruling in Edwards vs. Aguillard banning teaching Creationism in public schools:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/edwards-v-aguillard.html
“students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions.”
I did express often what I believed in my assignments when i was in public education through high school. I was never criticized by any teacher for doing so, as I was never disrespectful or threatening when doing so.
Why should it be any different now?
Here we present a draft genome sequence of the common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). Through comparison with the human genome, we have generated a largely complete catalogue of the genetic differences that have accumulated since the human and chimpanzee species diverged from our common ancestor, constituting approximately thirty-five million single-nucleotide changes, five million insertion/deletion events, and various chromosomal rearrangements. We use this catalogue to explore the magnitude and regional variation of mutational forces shaping these two genomes, and the strength of positive and negative selection acting on their genes. In particular, we find that the patterns of evolution in human and chimpanzee protein-coding genes are highly correlated and dominated by the fixation of neutral and slightly deleterious alleles. We also use the chimpanzee genome as an outgroup to investigate human population genetics and identify signatures of selective sweeps in recent human evolution.
Bottom line is that neither view can be proven or disproven by thought arguments. So pick your God, either from an old book, or from swooping arrows on a Scholastic evolution poster. Dinosaur -> SWOOPING ARROW -> Bird !... Monkey -> SWOOPING ARROW -> Man !
Choose wisely.
Can somebody please post a picture of a Swooping Arrow like used on evolution posters? Isn't that a divine image indeed? How about if we could show a picture of Darwin on a cross with a crown of Swooping Arrows and nailed to the cross with swooping arrows? Can I get a government grant or something for that?
ID doesn’t exist. It has been proven to be Creationism in disguise.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-tk7MkHKtI
This article points out yet another reason that public education is a very bad idea. The left was happy to seize education as a path to indoctrination, yet are oh so sensitive when others want their fair share of the captive student’s minds. If parents were free to choose where they sent their children to be educated, this would not be an issue.
Funny, I don't see the utter hopelessness or pointlessness of existence. There have been men who have loved life and died happy long before Jesus stepped foot on Earth.
That word, “theory,” is a big part of the problem. Many of those in favor of teaching intelligent design (especially non-scientists) use the word as a synonym for “speculation” or “hypothesis,” much in the same way that Creationists do. “Evolution is just a theory,” they will say. For their part, many opponents of teaching it (especially non-scientists) use the word as a synonym for “law,” or “proven facts.” They will point to ironclad theories like atomic theory or the theory of relativity as examples and make accusations of ignorance, bias or trickery against those who see evolution as anything but a proven fact on the level of gravity or germ theory.The problem with this is that a theory is not a guess or a fact, but a system or a model. It is a way of looking at phenomena, and sometimes it is new and relatively speculative and flawed, and other times it is well-proven and factual. The word “theory” is like the word “automobile.” Both the Edsel and the Corvette are a type of system described by the word “automobile,” but one was a disaster and the other is a revered classic. What we have is one group of people saying “Automobiles are Edsels” and another saying “Automobiles are Corvettes.” Most of the scientists seem to realize that neither statement is true; most of the people arguing on the talking head shows and on the editorial pages seem to be missing it.
Astronomy gives us a number of examples of scientific Edsels. Take for example the model of the Universe put forth by the 2nd Century astronomer Ptolemy. He had the Earth at the center of the Universe, with the stars on a rotating globe that surrounded the solar system. In his theory, the planets not only rotated around the Earth, but also circled around in a smaller orbit called an epicycle. Ptolemy’s model even fit the available data: The epicycles explained the retrograde motion of the planets, a phenomenon no one had properly explained before.
Of course, we know Ptolemy was way off. But we also know that his model was a theory, and that the correct model that replaced it was also a theory.
I hope I've been helpful.
Dang straight!
Tell me the "scientific" difference between your thesis and the above?
My thesis is consistent with observable facts and experimental evidence and does not rely on magic.
“Who’s stopping parents teaching their kids?”
Oh I dunno, high taxes maybe? Working moms needing to pay off taxes? A fortune shoveled into public schools while moms have to work. Things like that.
Oh wait...there's something wrong with that. I guess all that stuff came after we stopped "proselytizing" in the schools by acknowledging that a Creator exists. You know, you post the Ten Commandments and everyone automatically converts to Christianity, it's simple as pie...
Good advice. There should be a delete button on here. I apologize Shery. My feeble excuse is that I have typed my fingers raw posting scientific articles supporting evolution and every so often someone comes along and says there is NO evidence for evolution. It is no excuse for getting personal and again, Shery, I'm sorry.
Have all the churches closed too?
You bring up a good point. I am certain of one thing — our education system is broken. And grant-hungry scientists are discredited.
Parents need more freedom to decide how their children are educated. The government run system has brought a new meaning to the word, ‘Failure’.
==========================================
"Pastor Gino Geraci, whose church was just three blocks from Columbine and who had the opportunity, as a police chaplain, to be at the scene while the killing rampage unfolded, ..... recounted the conversation he had with a high-ranking official in the Columbine school district right after the shooting had stopped.
Weeping, this educator asked Pastor Geraci why such a tragedy could happen.
Gino had to tell him that his schools “have taught our children that they come from nowhere, and that is where they’re going, and that life is a point of pain in a meaningless existence. And they believed you.”"
Did you ever say that the earth was 6000 years old in a science paper?
Saying that the findings of scientists in the intelligent design field aren’t valid because some creationists have written about it is like saying that GOP tax policy is a plan of the worldwide Jewish cabal because an orthodox Jewish banker worte an op-ed supporting it.
If NASA finds evidence that seems to support creationism (or at least call the current cosmology into question) and Ken Hamm puts it on his website, does that mean we have to scrap the space program because it’s a missionary organization?
==================================
Bears repeating. Follow the money.
“Have all the churches closed too?”
All the churches I’ve heard about charge thousands of dollars for their school programs. Parents would have to pay twice. That suggestion stinks. Sorry.
Good on you, sir.
There have been no scientific findings in support of ID as admitted under oath by Michael Behe himself
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.