Posted on 03/10/2006 8:09:38 AM PST by LouAvul
South Carolina (AP) -- The state Board of Education on Wednesday rejected a state panel's proposal to change high school standards on evolution by calling on students to "critically analyze" the theory.
Science teachers had complained that although critical analysis is part of all science, the wording was really a backdoor attempt to force educators to teach religious-based alternatives. In a 10-6 vote, board members agreed.
The Education Oversight Committee, a school reform panel made up of lawmakers, teachers, parents and other community members, recommended the change last month. Panel member Senator Mike Fair, R-Greenville, has said it was intended to introduce students to challenges to evolutionary theory.
Education Superintendent Inez Tenenbaum, a Democrat, has called the effort "a ploy to confuse the issue of evolution so that ultimately evolution won't be taught."
Officials disagreed over the effect of the vote.
Education department officials say the vote leaves previous science standards adopted in 2002 in place. But Representative Bob Walker, R-Landrum, said both the Education Oversight Committee and the Board of Education must agree on new standards.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
It is not necessary to compare them with anyone. They have their own history. They are of theology and theology is philosophy. Philosophy is argument for faith and belief in proposed unknowns. Philosophy has produce little or no new knowledge in thousands of years. Christians for thousands or years refused science and math. They refused facts, knowledge and absolutes. They simply would not permit any new methods to determine facts or knowledge if it challenged there faith and belief. They preferred to ride donkeys and remain the same.
It was not until the middle ages that some Christians accepted Aristotelian methods and and science was permitted. Since that time there has been more facts and knowledge determined than in the whole existence of Christians. There has been more knowledge and fact produced by science and math in the last 150 years than was previously known in the history of mankind.
Yet today there are many Christians that still refuse science of would make science adhere to their beliefs or faith. If science produces a new fact of knowledge they simply say I don't believe the fact because it is not of my faith. If possible they would not permit science. They would prefer we all go back to riding donkeys. I would defer. However I would give those of philosophy (faith and belief) Christian their opportunity to refute science. They need only to produce a single new fact that is of philosophy and not science. I await the fact so I may join you............................
That's a silly argument, I've never used it, and I've never seen it used.
It is the province of government to force parents to give their kids an education. It's been that way in the US for over 150 years. That's what truancy laws are about.
It was a bipartisan GOVERNMENT study. I don't want to say more because I don't want any prior beliefs about an organization or group to influence what purports to be an objective look at the science. In other words, if an alleged objective group looked at the actual science, which side did they come down on?
You mean, there are more clergymen who endorse evolution than scientists who endorse creationism?
I'm shocked I tell you, shocked!
They are not. A firetruck and an apple are both red. And it is "redness" that we are discussing here.
Absolute rubbish.
This kind of Christian bashing adds nothing constructive to the crevo debate. Please cease and desist.
They simply would not permit any new methods to determine facts or knowledge if it challenged there faith and belief. They preferred to ride donkeys and remain the same.
More rubbish.
It was not until the middle ages that some Christians accepted Aristotelian methods and and science was permitted.
Try all of Western Christendom. Artistotelian methods became incorporated into scholasticism, which became the dominant theological school in the Catholic Church and remained that way for 500 years.
Remember what I said in post #7?
I think this may be a new record. It only took 16 posts for an evo to compare Christians to Mooselimbs.
Why not, Christianity originated in those few sandy countries during the same period as Mooselimbs. Their main argument was who was the returned prophet, Jesus or Mohammad.
That's pretty much it. They lost the debate with scientists before 1880. (the last anti-Darwin scientist was Agassiz 1807-1873)
Yet not all Christians or Muslims believe in creationism. Plenty of educated and enlightened followers are able to incorporate evolution into their world view without contradicting their religious faith.
Also, Christianity has been around for many centures while evolution has been around for only a couple. Now I may be reading the wrong history books but I don't see much evidence that people were acting less 'like animals' before Darwin introduced his theory and it began to be taught in public school. In fact, people seem to act 'like animals' whether they know they are one or not. heh
Were you responding to PH or me?
If to my post, since when do Catholics endorse abortion? I seem to remember recently some Catholic clergy who pointedly refused to recognize members of congress because they supported abortion. The Kennedys don't count, they abandoned their faith decades ago.
Since when does the Catholic church officially endorse child molestation? They've paid through the nose in money and PR because they allowed a few bad apples into their clergy. That's not new. The Southern Baptist child molester my ex-wife married was excused by my ex-in-laws (Southern Baptist minister) because "the child made him do it". Right. That was even after the guy was convicted! Catholics have no monopoly on bad clergy. Read up on Jim Jones sometime.
You can read anything you want into Genesis, even if it doesn't fit reality. But using government to force your faith to be taught as science in a public school is way over the top. No scientist is trying to force your church to preach evolution, so why do you think it should work the other way round?
However, this is digressing into an abortion discussion, which I didn't intend and is more appropriate for another thread.
However, I do note that the original poster did not respond to my query, which is informative in itself. It really is a simple science question devoid of preconceived agendas.
That's one way to prove that "flood geology" is wrong - the oil companies have no use for it.
Thank God!
Doctrinal arguments about what the Bible means have been going on for centuries. But there no real argument among scientists about whether evolution occurs. I'll go with the folks who have their story straight.
Festival-of-whining-schoolboys-bursting-into-tears placemarker.
So good I used it twice.
Absolute rubbish.
This kind of Christian bashing adds nothing constructive to the crevo debate. Please cease and desist.
They simply would not permit any new methods to determine facts or knowledge if it challenged there faith and belief. They preferred to ride donkeys and remain the same.
More rubbish.
It was not until the middle ages that some Christians accepted Aristotelian methods and and science was permitted.
Try all of Western Christendom. Artistotelian methods became incorporated into scholasticism, which became the dominant theological school in the Catholic Church and remained that way for 500 years.
What is determined rubbish is of your opinion (faith and belief). It opinion and argument. By the way Aristotelian methods were retrieve by Christians from the Arabs who also refused them. Provide the fact that Christianity has produced and I am with you.............
If they say we are animals, than what does it matter? We are nothing of note, who cares. I am an ape without hair, I sure feel good about that.
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.