Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: AbeKrieger

As a biology teacher, it is frustrating to be AFRAID to mention God/Creation/ID when you are discussing evolution. Many kids in my classes were very opposed to hearing about evolution, and they wanted to talk about what they believed. Of course, our entire curiculum was built around evolution as a foregone conclusion. But, I really felt (and still feel) that denying the teachers the freedom to allow other ideas to be discussed certainly IS a form of censorship. And I rarely utter that word since I think it is totally overused.
BTW I am a Christian, but I don't think we nec understand the creation story in the Bible as written, so the ideas in evolution aren't a hot button issue for me. I just honestly think that we have people who are literally trying to supress any other viewpoint. Where is the diversity?
susie


14 posted on 12/20/2005 8:29:55 AM PST by brytlea (I'm not a conspiracy theorist....really.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: brytlea

Thanks for that bit of common sense.


16 posted on 12/20/2005 8:33:08 AM PST by wallcrawlr (Pray for the troops [all the troops here and abroad]: Success....and nothing less!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

To: brytlea
God Bless and Merry Christmas!

It's refreshing to have it stated with such simple reason - The only folks that get hurt by mention of God and/or Creationism are those who make their living in the study of evolution. Hearing that not everyone buys it as a stand-alone theory damages nobody. Some would say it hurts our kids scientifically, but I fail to see how it makes kids stupid - if they want to pursue scientific careers, the knowledge of opposing viewpoints will not eat the scientific aptitude from their brains. My belief in God does not take my ability to use math or the scientific method away from me. Of course, I would not likely pursue evolution as a study, but that is not the scientific area that keeps us technologically competitive. It is more akin to the liberal arts in that it makes one feel happy to have the information, but is not a specific boon to Mankind.

28 posted on 12/20/2005 8:46:51 AM PST by trebb ("I am the way... no one comes to the Father, but by me..." - Jesus in John 14:6 (RSV))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

To: brytlea

The judge said the ID'ers have "bona fide and deeply held
beliefs which drive their scholarly endeavours", he did
not say ID is a bad idea...he just said he felt that the
school board was trying to inject religion, and had lied
about their intentions...

Doesn't the fact that people are in arms cuz their theory
is challenged tell you something?
What it tells me is that there are some deeply held beliefs
that are being challenged. Is it possible that you as a
teacher could talk about problems with evolutionary theory
without introducing any talk about (shudder!) the possibility
of a Creator(man or God, or alien)...

An interesting question....if mankind learns enough to be
able to "create" a life form, would it display any evidence
that it was created, or since "it" would have to run on
known physical laws, could someone who discovered the life
form, say in the unconnected future, proclaim it had evolved?

Another interesting question...could mankind evolve enough
such that life can be created by us? If so, does that prove
that life can be created, and doesn't HAVE to evolve by
itself?

Finally, could an alien entity, advanced in biological
technology have created life on this planet?


32 posted on 12/20/2005 8:58:01 AM PST by Getready ((fear not...))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

To: brytlea
I think that that is why the evolution debate is considered such an agenda by the scientists by many. If you can hardly discuss it when the KIDS bring it up and can't mantion the "G" word, then it's more than just about "teaching science correctly". It's just not realistic to restrict the subject matter in any one subject to only the sublect being taught. Like you can't discuss anything not Social Studies in the SS class or if it's not Math, you can't touch it in math class. I remember discussing alchemy in Chemistry and no one is having meltdowns about that. Sometimes you can get into really intersting discussions and learn a lot by going off topic *occasionally*. I also think it helps develop critical thinking skills.

I agree about you opinion of the creation story. It's so often criticized for being "inaccurate" but really, just how much info can be put into a couple chapters that deal with such a broad and complex topic. I think all in all it's a pretty good summary of what happened and has much more scientific support than a lot of scientists give it credit for.

38 posted on 12/20/2005 9:03:21 AM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

To: brytlea
I just honestly think that we have people who are literally trying to supress any other viewpoint.

Good point!

If both science and religion are about 'truth', how can anyone expect to understand what is and isn't 'true' if we only get to hear one side of the story?

I see nothing wrong with teaching evolution in science and having a theology course to teach ID.

The former could dissect the mechanics of life while the latter expounded on the miracle of it.

Having one side trying to completely eradicate any mention of the other does students a HUGE disservice, IMHO!

45 posted on 12/20/2005 9:23:38 AM PST by MamaTexan (I am NOT a 'legal entity', nor am I a *person* as created by `law`!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

To: brytlea

I don't think we nec understand the creation story in the Bible as written, so the ideas in evolution aren't a hot button issue for me. I just honestly think that we have people who are literally trying to supress any other viewpoint. Where is the diversity?

Biology class is for biology. Students should be taught science. Scientific theories make testable predictions about the world we live in. Science helps us understand our natural world as it is. Scientists use science to understand biology and disease, develop new treatments and to predict where the natural world is headed. In schools, students should be trained in scientific thinking to participate in this endeavor.

Understanding evolution is fundamental to science. Why do bacteria develop resistance to antibiotics? Why do viruses affect some species but not others? Why does sickle cell trait reduce likelihood of malaria infection and therefore become a selected trait?

Belief in a creator does not constitute scientific thinking and will not help solve biological problems in the world we inhabit. I have no objection to teaching creationism or ID or alien origins or ghosts or exorcism or any other fantastical explanation of the world- in homes, in church, or in a private retreat.

But please leave science classes to science.


48 posted on 12/20/2005 9:31:24 AM PST by WritetheNews
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

To: brytlea

susie, if you are a biology teacher, why are you playing this stupid, "but we must explore the options" crap? Do you encourage little Johnny and Suzie to explore the flying spaghetti monster story of creation as well?


52 posted on 12/20/2005 9:42:51 AM PST by jess35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson