Posted on 10/13/2009 8:10:10 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
O’Reilly told Dawkins”
you insist you can’t even mention it, that is fascism, sir.
Was he right? Is it constitutional/scientific to insist that only materialistic evolution can be taught?
See: O’Reilly vs. Atheist Author Richard Dawkins...
(Excerpt) Read more at uncommondescent.com ...
Schools are putting out myriads of kids who can’t read and write as it is.
Not teaching them something that is covered in a few days of one year of high school biology is not *ignorance*.
There’s plenty more science that can fill in that gap that they NEED to know.
Focusing that time on the actual use and application of the scientific method would be a good start.
Right now, the ToE is being used primarily as an indoctrination tool for the secular humanist ideology.
Where are the demands from the evos that science not be abused and misused to promote political agendas or religious ideologies?
I thought so.
Until then, it would be best dropped from the curriculum and would absolutely not hurt any student’s academic career, since it’s not likely that the ToE is being taught correctly to begin with considering the number of misconceptions about it on both sides for all the decades that it has had a monopoly in the public education system.
This country did just fine for centuries in the area of scientific and technological development while creation was taught in schools and evolution not. There has been no detectable improvement in the education levels of the public schools with the introduction of evolution and the elimination of creation. On the contrary, the quality of education has continued to decline steadily.
The two other options, private school and homeschool, do better academically and often, because of the religious nature of the education, teach BOTH creation and evolution and those students consistently score better than their public school counterparts.
There is no evidence whatsoever, that teaching creation, or not teaching evolution will lead to ignorance. Evos simply have NO support for that tired old canard that they trot out every time the subject comes up.
Hello......
It's called the public school system.
Is there something in Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; that you don't get?
Why the litmus test for religion?
What are you doing on FR anyway, noob, promoting that kind of socialist, government control of education?
Religious people pay taxes as much as anyone. Why are you proposing coercing the taxes out of them to support public education which endorses ideology which they don't agree with and then telling them that if they want any different that they have to pay for it out of their own pockets? Why should only non-religious people and institutions get the money coerced from the religious people?
This country was founded on Judeo-Christian values and worked just fine for centuries when Bible reading and prayer were part of the opening of every school day.
Why is that not acceptable any more?
His single-minded insistence that only one point of view — his own — be presented in the public schools looks, if not necessarily "fascist," then pretty darned totalitarian to me.
Because leftist activists, entrenched in the positions of influence, simply don't (and won't) like it. No point arguing with them, we need a reconquista, and then we can argue among ourselves (at the school board level) if the "young Earth creationism" belongs to science classes, or rather should be taught as religion.
I agree, but the counter argument is that without 'free' education only the rich will get a good education and society would be the poorer for that.
The atheistic liberal/Marxists are the strongest defenders of government schools ( and this includes the atheistic materialistic evolutionists). Of course they do! The government schools are using other people's money to indoctrinate our nation's children in their their annointed religious worldview.
Speaking for myself (I am an atheist) I am a libertarian and do not support public education, neither do my libertarian brethren. Generalizations are hard sometimes.
Vouchers/tuition tax credits nullify this argument.
Foregoing a year of biology produces ignorance of biology.
Focusing that time on the actual use and application of the scientific method would be a good start.
May I recommend that you take your own advice and apply it to creationism?
Where are the demands from the evos that science not be abused and misused to promote political agendas or religious ideologies?
All over the place. Check out Climate Audit or WUWT for two obvious examples.
The two other options, private school and homeschool, do better academically and often, because of the religious nature of the education, teach BOTH creation and evolution and those students consistently score better than their public school counterparts.
Like I said before, you need to refresh yourself on the scientific method. Cherry picking data is dishonest at best. Also teaching 'both' is not equivalent to teaching neither.
There is no evidence whatsoever, that teaching creation, or not teaching evolution will lead to ignorance. Evos simply have NO support for that tired old canard that they trot out every time the subject comes up.
If someone hasn't been exposed to or taught something, they are by definition ignorant.
Don’t you think that’s a red herring? It’s not a question of broadminded, is it? It’s a question of law.
It’s just as unconstitutional to bring in ‘sharia indoctrination’ into the public schools that we pay for, as it is to mandate that I have to pay for (tax incentive or otherwise) you to choose a religious based school.
BTW, where exactly was the ACLU & NOW when they brought sharia/koran indoctrination into the school in the Houston school district? No where-that’s why they are not to be trusted. Ideology over principal & law is a losing bet every time.
Would we really?
How much formal education did Thomas Edison, Benjamin Franklin or Abraham Lincoln have? On average, how much formal education did the Greatest Generation have,their parents, or their grand parents, yet, we enjoy today all that the 20th century invented and built.
And?...How many children are imprisoned in “free” government schools and fail to learn anything at all ( except to be good prisoners of the state)? How many children's lives are utterly ruined because of their government school experiences?
And...I wasn't generalizing. I was specific about my comment. It does seem from these Freeper posts that ( specifically) atheistic liberal/Marxists **are** the strongest defenders of the government schools on these threads. Atheistic libertarians do not in any way fall into the category of liberal/Marxist. Liberal/Marxism is, in my opinion, a religious worldview. Atheistic liberal/Marxism is merely a subset of the general religious worldview of Liberal/Marxism.
You are still free to exercise your religion, just not on my dime. And are we talking about exercising religion or education? I’m no fan of the leftist indoctrination of public school kids. For me the first concern is getting back to teaching the children the Constitution and the difference between being a subject and a citizen.
Tuition tax credits do not make it “indoctrinating on your dime”. It just means that people pulling out their kids from the system of public indoctrination get their money back. To make it completely fair, such tax credits should apply to property taxes, if someone opts out of the public system.
Atheistic , liberal marxists.
Why so much hatred in your heart for people you disagree with on evolution?
Ok, I will spell it out for you. Not for your benefit, but for others who may be reading this post.
It is IMPOSSIBLE TO HAVE A RELIGIOUSLY NEUTRAL SCHOOL!
A school with a godless worldview is no more religiously neutral than a God-centered school. Both must exclude and include curriculum that make it either godless or God-centered. Excluding or including certain materials and ideas is NOT neutral in content or consequences. Both have **profoundly*** non-neutral religious, cultural, and political consequences.
It is for this reason that it is ***impossible** for government to be involved in education in any way without stepping in a great big pile of First Amendment and freedom of conscience dog pooh!
It is for First Amendment and freedom of conscience reasons that we must begin the process of privatizing universal K-12 education.
As far as I know the Supreme Court has never addressed ( specifically ) whether a godless worldview in government education is religiously neutral or not. Their rulings are **deliberately** and extremely surgically narrow in their scope regarding government schools.
But...Please read my tag line. Ideas are very powerful. It is through ideas that large, seemly intractable institutions can lose their legitimacy seemingly over night. Martin Luther and the Catholic Church, our American Revolution, and Louis IVX are examples.
Education is never religiously, culturally, or political neutral. It is a powerful idea and this idea alone can ( and possibly will) lead to the complete de-legitimization of government education.
Now...The usual response from the atheist is that atheism is philosophically religiously neutral. No it is not. At this point, in discussing this issue with an atheist, the conversation devolves into:
A godless education is religiously neutral.
No it is not. Scrubbing God from the curriculum is not religiously neutral. It teaches children how to scrub God from their life. It teaches children to think godlessly. It teaches children to compartmentalize their faith. It is not religiously neutral for the government to do this to children, and it has non-neutral religious, cultural, and political consequences.
A godless education is religiously neutral.
No it is not. Scrubbing God from the curriculum is not religiously neutral. It teaches children how to scrub God from their life. It teaches children to think godlessly. It teaches children to compartmentalize their faith. It is not religiously neutral for the government to do this to children, and it has non-neutral religious, cultural, and political consequences.
A godless education is religiously neutral.
No it is not. Scrubbing God from the curriculum is not religiously neutral.It teaches children how to scrub God from their life. It teaches children to think godlessly. It teaches children to compartmentalize their faith. It is not religiously neutral for the government to do this to children, and it has non-neutral religious, cultural, and political consequences.
A godless education is religiously neutral.
No it is not. Scrubbing God from the curriculum is not religiously neutral.It teaches children how to scrub God from their life. It teaches children to think godlessly. It teaches children to compartmentalize their faith. It is not religiously neutral for the government to do this to children, and it has non-neutral religious, cultural, and political consequences.
And...So it goes.
Why are you free to have your non-neutral religious worldview established by the government and paid for by taxpayers?
Since it is IMPOSSIBLE to have religiously neutral school, there is only ONE possible solution:
We must begin the process of privatizing universal K-12 education. We must have complete separation of SCHOOL and state.
I “believe” in evolution, and where appropriate taught it to my homeschooled children.
As for hate...When did you become a mind reader? How are you able to divine the intentions of my heart?
Finally,...When posters start calling others “haters”, they have lost the argument.
“Ignorance isn’t an answer either”.
Huh?
Just nevermind it’s been working just fine for evolutionists and liberals for the past 3-4-5 decades?
...global warming anyone?
Or how about Detroit schools graduating kids at a rate of 25%, give or take a few % points?
Indeed evos are silent about the NEA, ACLU and liberals in general hijacking public schools since it’s their ideology that’s “winning” anyway...who cares if schools are utter failures, just so long as liberals including evos, get God out and don’t have their liberal sensibilites threatened or offended in any way.
but the mind-numbed robotic ideologic indoctrination into secular humanism vs. the pitiful so-called “education” kids are receiving are two different issues entirely. A double-whammy loss for this country.
Face it liberalism is a disease.
Ever ask yourself why no high profile liberal supports creationism?
Why the litmus test for religion?
What are you doing on FR anyway, noob, promoting that kind of socialist, government control of education?
Religious people pay taxes as much as anyone. Why are you proposing coercing the taxes out of them to support public education which endorses ideology which they don’t agree with and then telling them that if they want any different that they have to pay for it out of their own pockets? Why should only non-religious people and institutions get the money coerced from the religious people?
This country was founded on Judeo-Christian values and worked just fine for centuries when Bible reading and prayer were part of the opening of every school day.
Why is that not acceptable any more?
Obviously, because more and more and more of those that were indoctrinated in the gubmint screwel indoctrination centers have all growed up and don’t know any better...
and by the looks of some of the 14 year olds here, they honestly do not appear to have been exposed to anything else and you could argue they are at least exposed to conservatism right here on FR, but look how they react to actual education and a different perspective here...
they’ve been so well indoctrinated that they’re utterly resistant to ANY logic and reason on FR.
Funny, it seems to happen quite often, it is jut when it is presented to boards, often, one side looses the debate and they claim they were ‘jackbooted’. If you are ‘winning every time’ then why are you complaining? If your argument is so strong, it should be pretty obvious what is ‘right’ and you shouldn’t be having the issues you do. Of course, it is always someone else’s fault. It isn’t fault with your debate, evidence, etc.
Actually the likes of ThomasMore, ACLJ have begun responding to the ACLU and NEA and other liberals...but like ACORN your liberal infrastructure is deeper by miles, and alot wider too.
But hey, as long as people can keep their hands over the ears and scream lalalalalala...so they don’t have to hear GOD...while the country slips further behind the rest of the world, it’s all good.
“You are still free to exercise your religion, just not on my dime”.
And how come that doesn’t work for you? How come we have to support your religion on our dime?
And how is exercising my religion any of your business?
Who appointed you to be the judge of what is and isn’t done in plublic, or with public money in the first place?
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.