Palin wants creationism taught in schools

[Inferno]

Certainly the greek gods are taught in school. Should that be removed?

It is taught as myth. If god is taught as a myth then certainly that is fine. But it must be filed under myth.

 

[SwingVoter]

I don't think it's fair that an atheist idea like evolution is propagated in school

I'm a church going Christian who believes strongly in evolution. Many of us believe in Jesus, but also don't believe the story in Genesis took place as written in the Bible. Read Francis Collins sometime, he states the Christian case for evolution better than anyone.

 

[Caveguy]

I've always found it odd that people who are so in the tank for evolution are so against the strong surviving.

If evolution is the superior ideal, why have all those social safety nets if it's nature's will that the weak die off?

Looks very inconsistent to me..

Just like all liberal thought it's not about the problem it's about control and power.

Global Warming is about guilting people into buying mercury filled lightbulbs and penalizing the strong. It flies in the face of evolution.

Darwinism is about much the same.

I do believe we evolved from lower beings. At one time every one was liberal. I've evolved.

 

[Ravi]

I've always found it odd that people who are so in the tank for evolution are so against the strong surviving.

If evolution is the superior ideal, why have all those social safety nets if it's nature's will that the weak die off?

Looks very inconsistent to me..

Just like all liberal thought it's not about the problem it's about control and power.

Global Warming is about guilting people into buying mercury filled lightbulbs and penalizing the strong. It flies in the face of evolution.

Prolly because you look at evolution as an individual surviving, while us rational people look at as a tribe, or culture, surviving. Some of the weakest links, when it comes to brawn, are the most adventatioius to human kind as a whole

 

[DiveCon]

Prolly because you look at evolution as an individual surviving, while us rational people look at as a tribe, or culture, surviving. Some of the weakest links, when it comes to brawn, are the most adventatioius to human kind as a whole

yeah, thats why you are for killing them in the womb

 

[jillian]

no where in my post did i say teach creationism in science class. my point was that children are being taught evolution in school, why not teach creationism as well?

I'm sorry to have to say this, but I don't think it's fair that an atheist idea like evolution is propagated in school, but if anyone teaches anything that is related to God it's look down upon.

i think it's only fair that they teach both in school. so children can be exposed to both ideas

if you teach creationism as part of a comparative religion class, no problem. If they pretend it's science... it doesn't belong in schools. Last I checked the Constitution still prohibits the state teachin religion. Thank heaven.

 

[Silence]

yeah, thats why you are for killing them in the womb

holy shit, does everything have to come back to abortion? really?

The problem with creationism being taught in school is that there is a thing called separation of church and state. What happens to the kids who practice a different belief or no belief at all? do they get a pass to the library while the teacher talks about Adam's rib and how God made Eve out of it?

Evolution is taught from a scientific perspective, not a ideological one. There is evidence that species have evolved over the centuries to become the creatures we know today.

Do I think we evolved from Apes? Not sure cuz if we did, why are there still Apes? but I digress...

creationism is the responisbility of the church and parents to teach a child because it's a question of faith not necessarily fact.

 

[Annie]

Hello. I'm against ID in schools at least regarding science curriculum, but let's take a look at what Palin actually said:

adn.com | elections : 'Creation science' enters the race

'Creation science' enters the race
GOVERNOR: Palin is only candidate to suggest it should be discussed in schools.

By TOM KIZZIA
Anchorage Daily News

(Published: October 27, 2006)

The volatile issue of teaching creation science in public schools popped up in the Alaska governor's race this week when Republican Sarah Palin said she thinks creationism should be taught alongside evolution in the state's public classrooms.

Palin was answering a question from the moderator near the conclusion of Wednesday night's televised debate on KAKM Channel 7 when she said, "Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both."

Her main opponents, Democrat Tony Knowles and Independent Andrew Halcro, said such alternatives to evolution should be kept out of science classrooms. Halcro called such lessons "religious-based" and said the place for them might be a philosophy or sociology class.

The question has divided local school boards in several places around the country and has come up in Alaska before, including once before the state Board of Education in 1993.

The teaching of creationism, which relies on the biblical account of the creation of life, has been ruled by the U.S. Supreme Court as an unconstitutional injection of religion into public education.

Last December, in a widely publicized local case, a federal judge in Pennsylvania threw out a city school board's requirement that "intelligent design" be mentioned briefly in science classes. Intelligent design proposes that biological life is so complex that some kind of intelligence must have shaped it.

In an interview Thursday, Palin said she meant only to say that discussion of alternative views should be allowed to arise in Alaska classrooms:

"I don't think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn't have to be part of the curriculum."

She added that, if elected, she would not push the state Board of Education to add such creation-based alternatives to the state's required curriculum...

 

[Silence]

well there ya go!

thanks for the clarification on what she said Kathianne. I'm not going to vote for her but I don't think people from either side should be taking shit out of context to fit their agenda.

Just tell the truth, it'll all work out in the end.

 

[Caligirl]

I've always found it odd that people who are so in the tank for evolution are so against the strong surviving.

If evolution is the superior ideal, why have all those social safety nets if it's nature's will that the weak die off?

Looks very inconsistent to me.

Compassion is also selected for, and group selection (kin selection) is too, it isn't all about the strongest individual. It's about the best traits. Evolution is a cool process that works at several levels.

 

[Caligirl]

Do I think we evolved from Apes? Not sure cuz if we did, why are there still Apes? but I digress...

(Technically all apes, including man, evolved from a common ancestor, which is no longer walking around. )

 

[DiveCon]

(Technically all apes, including man, evolved from a common ancestor, which is no longer walking around. )

that is what is taught

 

[Sunni Man]

(Technically all apes, including man, evolved from a common ancestor, which is no longer walking around. )

That nonsense is taught as a fact. When actually, there is more evidence that Santa Clause is real, than that man evolved from an ape ancester.

 

[Jeepers]

Evolution is just one mans theoryfrom the 1800's . It has no scientific proof backing it up. Creationism
has been around for thousands of years.And creationism should be taught in schools right
along with evolutionism.If we evolved from apes why are apes still around?.

Hey idiot.. we didnt evolve from apes... You people scare the hell out of me ... how in the hell is this nation going to compete in the world when this dark age mentality persavers...

 

[DiveCon]

Hey idiot.. we didnt evolve from apes... You people scare the hell out of me ... how in the hell is this nation going to compete in the world when this dark age mentality persavers...

yes, they teach we evolved from a common ancestor, however, there is no proof that common ancestor ever existed
thus it takes just as much faith to believe it did as it does to believe in creation

YMMV

 

[Sunni Man]

yes, they teach we evolved from a common ancestor, however, there is no proof that common ancestor ever existed
thus it takes just as much faith to believe it did as it does to believe in creation

Actually, it takes "MORE" faith to believe in evolution, than to believe in creation.

 

[Diuretic]

Actually, it takes "MORE" faith to believe in evolution, than to believe in creation.

Rubbish. There's actual evidence of evolution.

Creationism requires an acceptance of unprovable elements for someone to believe in it.

They must believe in a supreme deity without evidence.
They must believe this supereme deity - btw where did the deity come from? The usual answer is that the deity was always there, nice way out but requires more blind faith - created the universe.
They must believe that the deity created life on Earth.
All of this requires blind faith.

Darwin had to provide evidence of his theory and the theory has held up since he proposed it and evidence continues to mount to support it. Scientists are continually looking for evidence to refute it because by doing so we can learn more but try as they might the evidence supporting the theory of evolution simply becomes stronger.

The closed mind is the fundamentalist religious mind that refuses to accept that evolution is a scientific fact. The Roman Catholic church has accepted evolution, after a battle. It excommunicated Teilhard de Chardin for his work and only readmitted him after his death, when Vatican II accepted evolution.

The closed mind of the fundamentalist rejects evolution and tries to argue for creationism or the warped idea of ID. Why this is so I have no idea. It could be pig ignorance.

It could be fear that evolution disproves a deity. It doesn't and the Catholic church accepts that one can be a Catholic and believe in evolution. It isn't hard. You only have to accept that the deity, assuming existence, actually set it up that way.

Some of the crap posted here about religion and evolution and science is appalling ignorance. I find it hard to believe that people from an advanced nation could actually be so ignorant as to post this rubbish. It's embarrassing to read. You're making yourselves look foolish.

 

[Annie]

It could be fear that evolution disproves a deity. It doesn't and the Catholic church accepts that one can be a Catholic and believe in evolution. It isn't hard. You only have to accept that the deity, assuming existence, actually set it up that way.

To be honest, the Catholic Church is evolution biased. Get that, and the rest falls into place. It's the Bible Literals that believe ID may hold the key. Catholic teaching has never been literal.

 

[dilloduck]

Rubbish. There's actual evidence of evolution.

Creationism requires an acceptance of unprovable elements for someone to believe in it.

They must believe in a supreme deity without evidence.
They must believe this supereme deity - btw where did the deity come from? The usual answer is that the deity was always there, nice way out but requires more blind faith - created the universe.
They must believe that the deity created life on Earth.
All of this requires blind faith.

Darwin had to provide evidence of his theory and the theory has held up since he proposed it and evidence continues to mount to support it. Scientists are continually looking for evidence to refute it because by doing so we can learn more but try as they might the evidence supporting the theory of evolution simply becomes stronger.

The closed mind is the fundamentalist religious mind that refuses to accept that evolution is a scientific fact. The Roman Catholic church has accepted evolution, after a battle. It excommunicated Teilhard de Chardin for his work and only readmitted him after his death, when Vatican II accepted evolution.

The closed mind of the fundamentalist rejects evolution and tries to argue for creationism or the warped idea of ID. Why this is so I have no idea. It could be pig ignorance.

It could be fear that evolution disproves a deity. It doesn't and the Catholic church accepts that one can be a Catholic and believe in evolution. It isn't hard. You only have to accept that the deity, assuming existence, actually set it up that way.

Some of the crap posted here about religion and evolution and science is appalling ignorance. I find it hard to believe that people from an advanced nation could actually be so ignorant as to post this rubbish. It's embarrassing to read. You're making yourselves look foolish.

ok--who blabbed about us being so advanced ??

 

[Caligirl]

This is the nice thing about a scientific theory, and why the ability to make testable predictions is so important in science..

If man and all apes evolved from a common ancestor, then we can predict:

~That fossils that have similarities of several ape lineages should exist. As it happens, they do. This prediction has been found to be true.

~That the strata that these fossils are found in, should not have bones of modern day humans and apes. (bones of modern day apes should only be found in more recent strata). As it happens, human bones are not found in the older strata with the ancestor bones. The prediction has held up.

~ That the fossil record for great apes should be in certain geographic locations, such as Africa, consistent with where modern apes live and/or originated. THis prediction has held up.

These sorts of predictions are easy to make, and are easy to test. There are tons more. There are predictions about the chromosome structure, about the DNA relatedness, about dozens of things, predicted by evolutionary theory, and testable.

That's what makes it science. When a prediction is not found to hold up, the theory is modified. Science is not static. It is a process, not an answer.

Intelligent design and creationism make no testable predictions. They are static descriptions that provide an answer. They aren't science.