Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Kathianne said:Well that's 3 of us...
Kathianne said:If you want Christianity taught, go to a Christian school or homeschool. BTW, I have little against vouchers, with the exception that it's an opening for the gov't to tell private schools what they have to do. Have to pay the piper, ya know.
LuvRPgrl said:You are trying to prove their isnt an intelligent creator by using two examples where we know for a fact there were intelligent creators??? hahahha
Ok,,, well, we do have electric cars dont we? Didnt exactly evolve from the internal combustion engine, now did it? Before you make analogies between electric cars and gas cars,,,I can make the same analogies with various species with different forms of reproduction.
Fact is, the electric car would have eventualy came into being if there were no gasoline cars at all. Hence, it didnt necessarilly evolve from the internal combustion engine, otherwise you would have to conclude that all things with wheels evolved from the first one.
LuvRPgrl said:If you dont want my kids to be taught Christianity, then dont FORCE me to send them to public schools. And no, not everyone can afford private or homeschooling, hence SOME are FORCED to send them to public schools.
LuvRPgrl said:If you dont want my kids to be taught Christianity, then dont FORCE me to send them to public schools. And no, not everyone can afford private or homeschooling, hence SOME are FORCED to send them to public schools.
Not to mention, I have to pay TWICE if I do send them to a private school. So, if you want Christianity out, also remove the requirements attatched.
MissileMan said:Not having an option is not the same thing as being forced.
LuvRPgrl said:If you dont want my kids to be taught Christianity, then dont FORCE me to send them to public schools. And no, not everyone can afford private or homeschooling, hence SOME are FORCED to send them to public schools.
Not to mention, I have to pay TWICE if I do send them to a private school. So, if you want Christianity out, also remove the requirements attatched.
Kathianne said:You are not forced to send your children to a public school. I guess then the schools should by your logic, also be teaching the doctrines of Islam and Hebrew? What about the Wiccans? Atheists? Buddhists? No time left for reading and writing.
Kathianne said:You are not forced to send your children to a public school. I guess then the schools should by your logic, also be teaching the doctrines of Islam and Hebrew? What about the Wiccans? Atheists? Buddhists? No time left for reading and writing.
LuvRPgrl said:We are a Christian culture. No need to teach Islam. The anti school choice people in california used the same scare tactics to defeat the prop. for voucheers, "kids will be going to schools to teach them witchcraft"
And prop 13, its opponents claimed police and fire services would become terrible, but it passed and the services only improved. Scare tactics are meaningless to informed thinking people.
So, mandatory schooling to age 18 isnt law? Hmmm, I thought it was.
TheEnemyWithin said:Here's something in the Bible that may support C.D....
A guy in the Bible named his son Peleg, "for in those days was the earth divided." My mom has an English-to-Hebrew dictionary in the back of her Bible, and when I looked up "divided", the word is "Peleg" which means roughly "channel of water" and is also related to the word "earthquake." Put that in your pipe and smoke it!!
The implication wasn't that it is unsound bc of inability to observe vast time periods. I was simply pointing out that, BECAUSE we cannot observe the past we must "analyze evidence on hand" and determine which theory best fits the evidence. This is not operational science, where we can test again and again, like with gravity. We cannot REPEAT the formation of the earth and the emergence of life forms. We can only perform tests on the present environment and derive deductions from our observations.MissileMan said:I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say. You are implying that the theory evolution is unsound because it hasn't been observed due to the length of time involved. I posted the quote from your link about scientific method that explains how theories are derived in other fields where vast amounts of time are involved, like geology, paleontology, astronomy, etc. not through experiments, but through analysis of the evidence on hand.
Exactly.Hobbit said:That's the stance I take. I don't want to try to make you believe ID, just that it is a plausible theory instead of being told I'm stupid for not swallowing evolution hook, line, and sinker.
Maybe you ONLY like to eat eggs. Eggs here, eggs there, eggs everywhere. An INTELLIGENT person would of course abhor any variety.MissileMan said:The vast amount of diversity between all of the forma of life on this planet IMO speak volumes against there being one intelligent designer behind the whole thing. An intelligent designer would not have come up with the varying methods of reproduction for example. An intelligent designer would have applied the same method to all species. All animals would lay eggs, or give birth to live offspring, or would be marsupials, etc.
mom4 said:The implication wasn't that it is unsound bc of inability to observe vast time periods. I was simply pointing out that, BECAUSE we cannot observe the past we must "analyze evidence on hand" and determine which theory best fits the evidence. This is not operational science, where we can test again and again, like with gravity. We cannot REPEAT the formation of the earth and the emergence of life forms. We can only perform tests on the present environment and derive deductions from our observations.
You are, of course, perfectly entitled to your belief.MissileMan said:That's what I was trying to say also. That said, I believe the evidence for evolution far outweighs the evidence for creationism.
Powerman said:I see a few threads here pertaining to evolution.
I can understand if from a scientific standpoint you might not be completely sold on evolution.
But if you believe in creationism or ID why don't you apply the same thought process to that?
Why must there be a high standard of proof for evolution which so many of you despise yet you don't apply that to your own beliefs concerning faith? With faith there is no standard of proof. It's quite silly actually.
MissileMan said:That's what I was trying to say also. That said, I believe the evidence for evolution far outweighs the evidence for creationism.
Until you do, a Supreme Being is far more logical to me than out of nothing came something.
GunnyL said:Evolution is man's understanding and categorizing life's continued adaption to its environment. Everything is evolving or dead.
If you are saying there is more scientific evidence to support scientifc theories of origin than any religious theory, I beg to differ. You are incorrect.
