Religion in politics/schools

[Gudrid]

Now tell me what you think of his infusion of Christianity into politics, because I am quite sure you voted for this guy.

I voted for him as well. I call it a kissup to the shortsighted.

DiamondDave - understand that if you make it ok for only one religion to be taught in schools, at some point it will be a religion that you disagree with. Comparing Chaucer and Shakespeare doesn't work, unless you can come up with repeated examples of mass murder of Chaucer readers in the name of Shakespeare.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Have you watched any of Obama's speeches or commericals on tv lately? He is infusing direct quotes from the bible to sell his obamacare to christians. Now, don't you find that funny?????????????? Especially coming from a President that is pro-late term abortion, and has stated that this country was not founded on Christian Judeo beliefs. That we are not a Christian nation. Maybe he should read the constituion and the declaration of independence.

Now tell me what you think of his infusion of Christianity into politics, because I am quite sure you voted for this guy.

Sounds like GWB Lite

We are not a Christian nation, and have not since the ratification of the Constitution. However, we have become an extremely religious nation since the 2d Great Awakening, mainly (but not completely) Christian.

 

[rdean]

These are the steps of the “Scientific Method” directly from “Science Buddies”.

Ask a Question:
The scientific method starts when you ask a question about something that you observe: How, What, When, Who, Which, Why, or Where? And, in order for the scientific method to answer the question it must be about something that you can measure, preferably with a number.

Do Background Research:
Rather than starting from scratch in putting together a plan for answering your question, you want to be a savvy scientist using library and Internet research to help you find the best way to do things and insure that you don't repeat mistakes from the past.

Construct a Hypothesis:
A hypothesis is an educated guess about how things work:"If _____[I do this] _____, then _____[this]_____ will happen." You must state your hypothesis in a way that you can easily measure, and of course, your hypothesis should be constructed in a way to help you answer your original question.

Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment:
Your experiment tests whether your hypothesis is true or false. It is important for your experiment to be a fair test. You conduct a fair test by making sure that you change only one factor at a time while keeping all other conditions the same. You should also repeat your experiments several times to make sure that the first results weren't just an accident.

Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion:
Once your experiment is complete, you collect your measurements and analyze them to see if your hypothesis is true or false. Scientists often find that their hypothesis was false, and in such cases they will construct a new hypothesis starting the entire process of the scientific method over again. Even if they find that their hypothesis was true, they may want to test it again in a new way.

Communicate Your Results:
To complete your science fair project you will communicate your results to others in a final report and/or a display board. Professional scientists do almost exactly the same thing by publishing their final report in a scientific journal or by presenting their results on a poster at a scientific meeting.

It’s easy to understand why it’s not a religion. With a religion, you start with an “existing” answer. Do you see, you have the answer, and then build the facts to support a “known” answer.

""""From “How stuff works” on “peer review”:
Generally, the process of peer review involves an exchange between a journal editor and a team of reviewers, also known as referees. After the referees receive a paper from the editor, they read it closely and provide individual critiques, usually within two to four weeks. In their critiques, they:

· Comment on the validity of the science, identifying scientific errors and evaluating the design and methodology used
· Judge the significance by evaluating the importance of the findings
· Determine the originality of the work based on how much it advances the field. Reviewers also identify missing or inaccurate references.
· Recommend that the paper be published or rejected. Editors don't have to heed this recommendation, but most do.

These activities are common to all types of peer review. What varies is whose identities are known and whose are concealed. In the most traditional approach to peer review, known as single-blind review, reviewers know the author's identity, but not vice versa. Blinding the identity of reviewers enables them to comment freely and not worry about disgruntled authors seeking retribution for negative reviews. Another approach is double-blind review, in which the identities of the author and referees are both hidden, making it easier for reviewers to focus on the paper itself without being swayed by any preconceived ideas about the author or his institution. Finally, many journals have adopted open peer review. In this model, the author's and reviewers' identities are known to each other, a situation that forces reviewers, who can't hide behind a veil of anonymity, to provide more thoughtful critiques.""""


And that is only the very beginning. Scientific peer review encompasses scientists from the entire world and, like science itself, is a very complicated process.

Wouldn’t it be great if religion had “peer review”? Think about it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nobody is trying to force biblical teachings.. or force the bible onto anyone in public school... what NORMALLY is being asked is that different beliefs and theories be respected, such as not bashing children for having religious beliefs of intelligent design or whatever else... and since we have THEORIES of evolution, m-theory, etc and not absolute proofs of any of these theories, it is acceptable not to inherently bash opposing theories or beliefs

Now if the bible is looked at as a piece of historic literature, it is no different that having education on that than it is from having teachings on mythology, the old writings of communist leaders, the writings of Shakespeare, etc

And if people want a christian education, there are private schools and home schooling options that people have

Well yes, alot of christians are trying to force biblical teachings in school systems. First off, I believe you have a common misconception of scientific terms. Three of the most common being scientific law, hypothesis, and theory.

Scientific Law is a fact! It is true and universal and absolute.

A 'Theory' is not as you put stated it. A Scientific Theory is 'an explanation of a set of related observations or events...and verified multiple times.' One Scientist cannot create a theory, it has to be tested and the experiments re-conducted with the same results in the end many times for it to be found true. Now we call some findings 'theories' still because we are still learning and discovering mechanisms and intracies for that theory. It's not absolute yet, but ground is being made!

Now a hypothesis is more lax. It is mearly an educated guess based on what is observed. But as I said, it has to be educated, based on a rational string of facts, scientific assumption (b/c it hasn't been tested yet) and expected logical conclusion.

Yes, if the bible was looked at as simply a work of literature that would be exceptable. But, then in the name of equality, we'd have to teach the Qur'an, the Vedas, Confucius and on and on...

And yes, I agree entirely, if people want a christian education there are private schools. Go there to learn intelligent design. Which used to be called creation, which was banned from schools. So they cleaned up the name, made it sound more professional and sent it back out. But I'm not here to rant...

Evolution is a scientific theory.. just as the big bang is.. just as the theory of dinosaurs being reptiles was... just as many scientific theories that have since been cast away were....

I am not talking of hypotheses here... I am talking specifically about the scientific theories that are being taught (which I agree they SHOULD be taught)... what I do not agree with is the school and school officials taking it upon themselves to force children to abandon their faith and beliefs for a theory... hell, we don't even force kids to dissect a frog anymore, but we will attack the child's or the family's belief

And no... just because the bible would be used as an example of historic literature, does not mean that it would then be 'equal' to use the Koran or other religious writings... just as we don't force teaching Chaucer out of 'equality' just because we teach Shakespeare... you don't have to 'make up for' omission in the name of equality in such things.. or else you would have an endless list of things that would have to be taught

The rant above is the kool-aid talking! Where is "the school and school officials taking it upon themselves to force children to abandon their faith and beliefs for a theory"? In Biology class? Creationism and ID do not belong there. Teach competing -ologies in an epistemology class in college. In high school, teach a humanties class devoted to philosophy, comparative religion, which permits creationism, ID, and anti-evolutionary criticism.

Any student can pray in the public schools any time s/he wants to as long as (1) it does not disrupt the educational process (the teacher, not the parent, decides what that is), and (2) does not infringe on others who do not want to hear it.

Fringe religionists, do not attemp to abuse public tax dollars to force your religion on others in the public square. Santa Fe ISD TX learned twice from the Supremes that they can't do it. Now the yokes in Florida who thought they could flaunt a court order are going to learn it the hard way.

 

[SWGAFire]

Nobody is trying to force biblical teachings.. or force the bible onto anyone in public school... what NORMALLY is being asked is that different beliefs and theories be respected, such as not bashing children for having religious beliefs of intelligent design or whatever else... and since we have THEORIES of evolution, m-theory, etc and not absolute proofs of any of these theories, it is acceptable not to inherently bash opposing theories or beliefs

Now if the bible is looked at as a piece of historic literature, it is no different that having education on that than it is from having teachings on mythology, the old writings of communist leaders, the writings of Shakespeare, etc

And if people want a christian education, there are private schools and home schooling options that people have

Well yes, alot of christians are trying to force biblical teachings in school systems. First off, I believe you have a common misconception of scientific terms. Three of the most common being scientific law, hypothesis, and theory.

Scientific Law is a fact! It is true and universal and absolute.

A 'Theory' is not as you put stated it. A Scientific Theory is 'an explanation of a set of related observations or events...and verified multiple times.' One Scientist cannot create a theory, it has to be tested and the experiments re-conducted with the same results in the end many times for it to be found true. Now we call some findings 'theories' still because we are still learning and discovering mechanisms and intracies for that theory. It's not absolute yet, but ground is being made!

Now a hypothesis is more lax. It is mearly an educated guess based on what is observed. But as I said, it has to be educated, based on a rational string of facts, scientific assumption (b/c it hasn't been tested yet) and expected logical conclusion.

Yes, if the bible was looked at as simply a work of literature that would be exceptable. But, then in the name of equality, we'd have to teach the Qur'an, the Vedas, Confucius and on and on...

And yes, I agree entirely, if people want a christian education there are private schools. Go there to learn intelligent design. Which used to be called creation, which was banned from schools. So they cleaned up the name, made it sound more professional and sent it back out. But I'm not here to rant...

Evolution is a scientific theory.. just as the big bang is.. just as the theory of dinosaurs being reptiles was... just as many scientific theories that have since been cast away were....

I am not talking of hypotheses here... I am talking specifically about the scientific theories that are being taught (which I agree they SHOULD be taught)... what I do not agree with is the school and school officials taking it upon themselves to force children to abandon their faith and beliefs for a theory... hell, we don't even force kids to dissect a frog anymore, but we will attack the child's or the family's belief

And no... just because the bible would be used as an example of historic literature, does not mean that it would then be 'equal' to use the Koran or other religious writings... just as we don't force teaching Chaucer out of 'equality' just because we teach Shakespeare... you don't have to 'make up for' omission in the name of equality in such things.. or else you would have an endless list of things that would have to be taught

Yes YES, Scientific Theory! Just like the Big Bang! Theory being a list compiled of many, sometimes hundred of individual facts and tens of thousands of hours of scientific research, axioms and observable phenomena, Scientific method, empirical data. The list goes on! Not a prayer and a smile.

I suppose your also going to reject the latest DNA findings between Human chromosome 2 and chimps as a passing fade?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Well yes, alot of christians are trying to force biblical teachings in school systems. First off, I believe you have a common misconception of scientific terms. Three of the most common being scientific law, hypothesis, and theory.

Scientific Law is a fact! It is true and universal and absolute.

A 'Theory' is not as you put stated it. A Scientific Theory is 'an explanation of a set of related observations or events...and verified multiple times.' One Scientist cannot create a theory, it has to be tested and the experiments re-conducted with the same results in the end many times for it to be found true. Now we call some findings 'theories' still because we are still learning and discovering mechanisms and intracies for that theory. It's not absolute yet, but ground is being made!

Now a hypothesis is more lax. It is mearly an educated guess based on what is observed. But as I said, it has to be educated, based on a rational string of facts, scientific assumption (b/c it hasn't been tested yet) and expected logical conclusion.

Yes, if the bible was looked at as simply a work of literature that would be exceptable. But, then in the name of equality, we'd have to teach the Qur'an, the Vedas, Confucius and on and on...

And yes, I agree entirely, if people want a christian education there are private schools. Go there to learn intelligent design. Which used to be called creation, which was banned from schools. So they cleaned up the name, made it sound more professional and sent it back out. But I'm not here to rant...

Evolution is a scientific theory.. just as the big bang is.. just as the theory of dinosaurs being reptiles was... just as many scientific theories that have since been cast away were....

I am not talking of hypotheses here... I am talking specifically about the scientific theories that are being taught (which I agree they SHOULD be taught)... what I do not agree with is the school and school officials taking it upon themselves to force children to abandon their faith and beliefs for a theory... hell, we don't even force kids to dissect a frog anymore, but we will attack the child's or the family's belief

And no... just because the bible would be used as an example of historic literature, does not mean that it would then be 'equal' to use the Koran or other religious writings... just as we don't force teaching Chaucer out of 'equality' just because we teach Shakespeare... you don't have to 'make up for' omission in the name of equality in such things.. or else you would have an endless list of things that would have to be taught

Yes YES, Scientific Theory! Just like the Big Bang! Theory being a list compiled of many, sometimes hundred of individual facts and tens of thousands of hours of scientific research, axioms and observable phenomena, Scientific method, empirical data. The list goes on! Not a prayer and a smile.

I suppose your also going to reject the latest DNA findings between Human chromosome 2 and chimps as a passing fade?

DNA testing and chimps may relate to Elvis and CrusaderFrank, but it has nothing to do with this discussion.

 

[SWGAFire]

Sorry, was a bit of a hijack. (Lincoln Osiris' voice) I gets exciteded abouts my science, Man!

 

[rdean]

The SAME people want to put the BIBLE in PUBLIC SCHOOL and you don't see that as an ENDORSMENT of Christianity over ALL OTHER RELIGIONS?

Nobody is trying to force biblical teachings.. or force the bible onto anyone in public school... what NORMALLY is being asked is that different beliefs and theories be respected, such as not bashing children for having religious beliefs of intelligent design or whatever else... and since we have THEORIES of evolution, m-theory, etc and not absolute proofs of any of these theories, it is acceptable not to inherently bash opposing theories or beliefs

Now if the bible is looked at as a piece of historic literature, it is no different that having education on that than it is from having teachings on mythology, the old writings of communist leaders, the writings of Shakespeare, etc

And if people want a christian education, there are private schools and home schooling options that people have

Well yes, alot of christians are trying to force biblical teachings in school systems. First off, I believe you have a common misconception of scientific terms. Three of the most common being scientific law, hypothesis, and theory.

Scientific Law is a fact! It is true and universal and absolute.

A 'Theory' is not as you put stated it. A Scientific Theory is 'an explanation of a set of related observations or events...and verified multiple times.' One Scientist cannot create a theory, it has to be tested and the experiments re-conducted with the same results in the end many times for it to be found true. Now we call some findings 'theories' still because we are still learning and discovering mechanisms and intracies for that theory. It's not absolute yet, but ground is being made!

Now a hypothesis is more lax. It is mearly an educated guess based on what is observed. But as I said, it has to be educated, based on a rational string of facts, scientific assumption (b/c it hasn't been tested yet) and expected logical conclusion.

Yes, if the bible was looked at as simply a work of literature that would be exceptable. But, then in the name of equality, we'd have to teach the Qur'an, the Vedas, Confucius and on and on...

And yes, I agree entirely, if people want a christian education there are private schools. Go there to learn intelligent design. Which used to be called creation, which was banned from schools. So they cleaned up the name, made it sound more professional and sent it back out. But I'm not here to rant...

Uh, don't get mad, but a "Scientific Law" is actually something that is established and relates to certain "things" under "certain" conditions, but nothing is science in ever absolutely "definitive". That's just the way it is. It's why science is the opposite of religion.

In science, you look at "stuff" and try to come up with a reasonable explanation of why "stuff" happens. In religion, the answers are already there. There is nothing new to discover. You have already been "told". Don't question. Stop learning.

 

[AllieBaba]

Ring sure you can if you've got an opinion.

Dis, I guess I am just interested in the extremists because they are the ones who don't seem to understand the seperation of Church and State.

No, it's those who want Christians to shut up who don't understand the separation of church and state.

Separation of church and state was promoted as a way to ensure the freedom of people to publicly adhere to their own religion, without fear of repercussion or discrimination. That means if they want to refer to their religious values while running for office, they get to. It means that if they want their schools to allow prayer they get to. What it does NOT mean, and what it was meant to prevent, is that people of any religious persuasion be PREVENTED from publicly practicing their religion. In any public forum, in any public place. What it means is that the state CANNOT and WILL NOT force them to "hide" their religion.

 

[SWGAFire]

Yes, sure, under the exact conditions. I have no problem with that. It is what it is. The experiment can be replicated under identical circumstances, multiple times. I'm not sure if we really dissagree here.

Science: 'That's odd...'
Religion: 'That's god...'

 

[manifold]

I would like for some of you religious people to explain to me WHY you can't teach your kids about YOUR religion at home/church. Why is it you feel the need to PREACH to people who don't want to be a part of your religion(if I want to I will just look for the closest building with a cross). Why do you think YOUR religion should be in the PUBLIC square?

Shooting outliers in a barrel again huh?

 

[Gudrid]

It means that if they want their schools to allow prayer they get to.

Define this - do you mean organized prayer? If so, that's incorrect. If you mean that students have the right to pray in school, that is absolutely a protected right.

 

[AllieBaba]

Actually, no, it does not mean there can't be organized prayer in school. It means the government cannot require children to participate in organized prayer.

 

[AllieBaba]

PS, our school still includes God in the pledge of allegience, and almost every patriotic song they sing during the school concerts include God in them. Likewise, at Christmas, they sing true Christian hymns.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

I would like for some of you religious people to explain to me WHY you can't teach your kids about YOUR religion at home/church. Why is it you feel the need to PREACH to people who don't want to be a part of your religion(if I want to I will just look for the closest building with a cross). Why do you think YOUR religion should be in the PUBLIC square?

Shooting outliers in a barrel again huh?

Yeah a good analogy. I really didn't think about how confrontational my words were but please forgive me I had just come from Jen T's Islamification of schools thread. As I said before I apologize for the overly antagonist nature of my OP. I most certainly don't want to be the other side of the Jen T coin.

 

[Soaring]

Actually, no, it does not mean there can't be organized prayer in school. It means the government cannot require children to participate in organized prayer.

The government (and that means states as well) cannot require students to say the pledge of allegiance or salute the American or state flag either, but they try. As a Texas teacher, I always told my kids that they could sit quietly or go out into the hall while the pledge was being said. As far as praying in a public place, it was done at all football games in Texas, and most still do it. Teachers don't organize a prayer in our classrooms, but if a kid wants to pray by themselves, they certainly have that right. Now, I was shocked two days ago when I read that the Texas schools are going to be teaching the bible in school. Who in hell is going to teach it? Our teachers are not preachers. They have no expertise in teaching the bible in school, and besides......Christianity is only a small portion of our religions we have to deal with in a public school. Where are the other religion kids going to go when the bible is being taught? Outside to play? What a waste of time for educational purposes. Teach that shit at home and in the church. Public funded schools are not the place for it.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

So many religions so little time.

 

[Ringel05]

I would like for some of you religious people to explain to me WHY you can't teach your kids about YOUR religion at home/church. Why is it you feel the need to PREACH to people who don't want to be a part of your religion(if I want to I will just look for the closest building with a cross). Why do you think YOUR religion should be in the PUBLIC square?

Shooting outliers in a barrel again huh?

Yeah a good analogy. I really didn't think about how confrontational my words were but please forgive me I had just come from Jen T's Islamification of schools thread. As I said before I apologize for the overly antagonist nature of my OP. I most certainly don't want to be the other side of the Jen T coin.

CF, it's no big deal, it's ok. We're all imperfect, except for me of course.
(Believe that and I have a bridge for sale).

We all walk on water, more often than not there's a sidewalk just underneath.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Actually, no, it does not mean there can't be organized prayer in school. It means the government cannot require children to participate in organized prayer.

Children can organize for prayer provided (1) they do not disrupt the educational process, and (2) they are not coercive toward others by their presence of praying.

 

[JakeStarkey]

PS, our school still includes God in the pledge of allegience, and almost every patriotic song they sing during the school concerts include God in them. Likewise, at Christmas, they sing true Christian hymns.

An American socialist was responsible for that during the 1950s, only since WWII.