Posted on 08/02/2008 5:57:18 PM PDT by Kevmo
Posted on Saturday, August 02, 2008 8:44:19 AM by Soliton
don't remember when I first learned about the theory of evolution, but nowadays I find myself reading of it a great deal in the popular press and hearing it discussed in the media. As my daughter enters elementary school, I find myself anxious to discuss with her teachers what they will cover in science class and where in their curriculum they plan to teach evolution. OUR COUNTRY HAS LAWS THAT SEPARATE church and state. Public institutions like schools must be neutral on the subject of religion, as required by the Constitution's First Amendment. Our courts have mandated that creationism is not an appropriate addition to the science curriculum in public schools; yet supporters of intelligent design press to have antievolutionary discussions enter the science classroom. Creationists even advocate that, when leaching evolution, educators should add the disclaimer that it is "just a theory."
Let's consider why all of us as educated persons, scientists and nonseientists alike, should take note of what science is taught - and not taught - in our public schools. In common language, a theory is a guess of sorts. However, in scientific language, a theory is "a set of universal statements that explain some aspect of the natural world... formulated and tested on the basis of evidence, internal consistency, and their explanatory power."1 The theory of evolution meets all of these criteria.
(Excerpt) Read more at redorbit.com ...
(Excerpt) Read more at redorbit.com ...
From the Religion Moderator’s home page:
Types of threads and guidelines pertaining to the Religion Forum:
Prayer threads are closed to debate of any kind.
Devotional threads are closed to debate of any kind.
Caucus threads are closed to any poster who is not a member of the caucus.
For instance, if it says “Catholic Caucus” and you are not Catholic, do not post to the thread. However, if the poster of the caucus invites you, I will not boot you from the thread.
The “caucus” article and posts must not compare beliefs or speak in behalf of a belief outside the caucus.
Ecumenic threads are closed to antagonism.
To antagonize is to incur or to provoke hostility in others.
Unlike the “caucus” threads, the article and reply posts of an “ecumenic” thread can discuss more than one belief, but antagonism is not tolerable.
More leeway is granted to what is acceptable in the text of the article than to the reply posts. For example, the term “gross error” in an article will not prevent an ecumenical discussion, but a poster should not use that term in his reply because it is antagonistic. As another example, the article might be a passage from the Bible which would be antagonistic to Jews. The passage should be considered historical fact and a legitimate subject for an ecumenic discussion. The reply posts however must not be antagonistic.
Contrasting of beliefs or even criticisms can be made without provoking hostilities. But when in doubt, only post what you are “for” and not what you are “against.” Or ask questions.
Ecumenical threads will be moderated on a “where there’s smoke, there’s fire” basis. When hostility has broken out on an “ecumenic” thread, I’ll be looking for the source.
Therefore “anti” posters must not try to finesse the guidelines by asking loaded questions, using inflammatory taglines, gratuitous quote mining or trying to slip in an “anti” or “ex” article under the color of the “ecumenic” tag.
Posters who try to tear down other’s beliefs or use subterfuge to accomplish the same goal are the disrupters on ecumenic threads and will be booted from the thread and/or suspended.
Open threads are a town square. Antagonism though not encouraged, should be expected
Posters may argue for or against beliefs of any kind. They may tear down other’s beliefs. They may ridicule.
On all threads, but particularly “open” threads, posters must never “make it personal.” Reading minds and attributing motives are forms of “making it personal.” Making a thread “about” another Freeper is “making it personal.”
When in doubt, review your use of the pronoun “you” before hitting “enter.”
Like the Smoky Backroom, the conversation may be offensive to some.
Thin-skinned posters will be booted from “open” threads because in the town square, they are the disrupters.
If you do not specify the type of thread, it will be considered “open.”
Certain sources have been determined to monger hatred and are forbidden. Sources that link to those sources are also forbidden. These include Jack Chick, Jesus-is-Lord.com, Vdare, KKK, Aryan Nations, National Alliance, Christian Identity, the false Jesuit Oath, the false Oath of the Knights of Columbus, anti-Semitic sources.
Recap
Prayer threads.
Who can post? Anyone
What can be posted? Requests for prayers and prayers
What will be pulled? Any debate
Who will be booted? Repeat offenders.
Devotional threads.
Who can post? Anyone
What can be posted? Meditations
What will be pulled? Any debate
Who will be booted? Repeat offenders.
Caucus threads.
Who can post? Members of the caucus and those specifically invited
What can be posted? Anything but the beliefs of those who are not members of the caucus
What will be pulled? Reply posts mentioning the beliefs of those who are not members of the caucus. If the article is inappropriate for a caucus, the tag will be changed to open.
Who will be booted? Repeat offenders.
Ecumenic threads.
Who can post? Anyone
What can be posted? Articles that are reasonably not antagonistic. Reply posts must never be antagonistic.
What will be pulled? Antagonistic reply posts. If the article is inappropriate for an ecumenic discussion, the tag will be changed to open.
Who will be booted? Antagonists
Open threads – all untagged threads are open by default.
Who can post? Anyone
What can be posted? Anything within the FR general guidelines
What will be pulled? Anything outside the FR general guidelines
Who will be booted? Thin-skinned posters
Original FR discussion link:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2055375/posts?page=1#1
Here’s the first time I took this approach.
Should Scientism be considered a religion on Free Republic? [ecumenical thread]
Free Republic ^ | June 30, 2008 | Kevmo
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2038869/posts
Posted on Monday, June 30, 2008 4:44:00 PM by Kevmo
This makes no sense to me. You’re posting a duplicate thread because you don’t like the robust discussion occuring in the other one?
Just close down all public schools. If the government is going to pay for education, then give the parents vouchers to send them to the private school of their choice.
Why is that a problem for you?
I thought this was FREE Republic.
A lot of vitriol takes place in the guise of “robust discussion”. Basically, I would like to see a more polite debate on this topic and the Religion Mod has been generous enough to provide a pathway to such intention.
Well, I agree with the voucher part, but the closing down of public schools thing strikes me as going a bit too far. The presence of a robust voucher system would mean that topics like this would be irrelevant. If parents don’t want a hypothetical construct which has evil moral implications being taught to their kids, they can send them to another school. Case closed.
If the point was education instead of indoctrination, your suggestion would be a good one.
If the point was that parents should have authority to say what kind of education their kids get instead of the state dictating it, you’d have a good suggestion.
Well, you have a good suggestion, it’s just that the opposition is not dealing in good faith.
It’s a problem for me because this forum has standards of conduct and if anyone violates them the post is subject to being pulled and the poster disciplined if warranted.
Pulling out of an ongoing discussion where nobody is violating any of those standards, and hiding like a little girl behind the [ecumenical] shield in order to prevent opposing viewpoints is not what this forum is about.
The atmosphere on that other thread is not hostile to anyone. Some may be threatened by the mere mention of an opposing viewpoint, but if the solution is to hide and keep others out while offering NO new information, then what am I supposed to think?
If the state didn’t think it “knows better” than parents how kids should be educated - we’d already have the “robust voucher system”.
Why “must” it be taught? In 99.99% of occupations it makes absolutely no difference to your work or employer whether you believe in evolution or creationism.
hiding like a little girl behind the [ecumenical] shield
***Well, I’ll suggest that what you posted right here, is hostile and it violates the rules of ecumenical threads. We’ll let the Religion Mod decide if it is antagonistic. One thing is certain, it isn’t polite; how difficult is it for you to be polite?
My post #13.
Fine. All my posts from now on are ecumenical.
If it is a theory, treating it as fact is an act of faith, a religion in and of itself. There are multitudes of so called scientists whose passion about this theory’s factual status rival jihadists’ passion.
Soliton’s just got a bug up his butt about Christianity for some reason.
His is the reason that underlies most of the “we must teach evolution” attitude -
they claim “religious neutrality” (I chuckled when I read that bit), but they really want to destroy any vestiges of any reminders of Christianity in our society so that something in their conscience doesn’t get bothered.
Why “must” it be taught?
***Well, that’s the title of the article. I think the point the author is aiming at is more towards not allowing creationist teachings in the science classroom, hence the title. I agree with the notion of “let’s teach the controversy & let students decide for themselves.” It would actually spur on better research in the area, which is good science.
I agree, and in fact I think what we’re witnessing is the formation of a new religion, based upon scientism. That’s why I opened up the original discussion on whether scientism should be treated as a religion on Free Republic.
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.