It says ALLOWS the schools to teach it. It's the middle of the road between forcing and forbidding, both of which are evil and should not be in the hands of a bureaucrat/politician.

There, I fixed it for you.

As I see it, a school's purpose is to educate. Teaching about creationism in science classes is not education and it's definitely got nothing to do with science. Thus it should not be allowed. It's like allowing teachers to teach lolspeak instead of english in english classes.



Oh it's govt. education that is the bad apple? Is private education somehow bullshit free?
I think you missed the point, which was that kids shouldn't be taught religion since kids don't yet have the capability to differentiate, for example, creationism from science, nor do all have the capability to not succumb to the force-feeding of religion.

Essentially, it's a matter of free will (that thing even the religious nuts are pretty keen on); raising children to some belief system takes away their say on the matter for at least until they grow older and can make up their own mind, or even worse, for their whole lives.

_________________
www.ceekayed.com

If I would pick a religion of my own I would have to go with Scientology! That is one of the rare religions that are not a repeat and copy of a 100 other older religions.

The whole stories of especially Nora's Arc, Moses and Jesus Christ are all copies of older religions.

At least in Scientology you got an original story.

Creationism is just a new rewrite that eventually will become a religion on its own. The next all true religion that teaches creationism equals science and maybe this time Moses could be called John Smith and Jesus Christ could be called José Louise Brown.

But FSM is really much more fun:

From Wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pastafarian

Nope, but as a consumer, it's your choice on whether you are willing to indoctrinate your kids with the bullshit. With a private school, I can choose to not pay them any money and go somewhere else, but with a government school, I'm forced to pay (whether I go there or someplace else).

It's about freedom to choose.

I guess this is a bit offtopic, but i just wanted to point out that the public/private argument you make Fergy is relevant to the US, but not for instance to Sweden.

In Sweden _both_ private and public schools are funded by taxpayers, although some private schools charge additional fees as well.

See, there's the thing, I really don't believe public schools should be allowed to teach people "wrong". That's where govt. legislation comes in and prevents teachers from teaching lolspeak in english classes or creationism in science classes. Not everyone have the "freedom (money) to choose private education".

Besides, if you allow the teaching of religious doctrine in science classes, you should allow pastafarism to be taught too. And kopimism. But those would never be allowed. So where do you draw the line, exactly?

Fairly relevant btw: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/2 ... 37796.html

Lower IQ people also have lesser capability to critical thinking (can't be bothered to dig up those studies), that coupled with bad education is a pretty nasty pair.

Oh and yeah, we fund our private schools mainly from taxes too.

_________________
www.ceekayed.com

I'm gonna disagree with you for a second. As a future teacher, I have to say that depending on grade level the kids are able to differentiate. Usually evolution is not taught until high school and by that time the students should be able to distinguish their own believes.


And I'm going to get hung up on your words for this one. I think students should be TAUGHT religion in schools. I believe there is a difference between teaching and preaching. And that when we teach the students about religion then they are not as ignorant to opposing beliefs. There are plenty of studies that go along with this idea, but I'm about to go to church and honestly just don't want to be bothered to look for them. Now after saying that I'll agree that it is sad that this is happening in a science classroom instead of a social studies classroom. A lot of students already believe that science and religion cannot co-exist which is just going to lead to farther conflict. Instead we should be teaching our students that the two can co-exist because they are completely different things

_________________
Mynn L says:
I LOVE YOU ADAM

+1

I think Ceekayed point was to say that religion taught in science has many issues.

1st. Science teachers now need to teach a completely different subject which should require a new education on top of the teachers already have.

2nd. Either you preach it like a priest or you show it scientifically which would end up disproving creationism as it has been done over and over. It would end up causing a greater feud between religionists and those who do not want it taught in science.

3rd. We are talking about added something new without having anything outdated to take out which will reduce the quality of everything else being taught. Many see this as an attack on science.

If you want teaching from the bible in science class then you have to show scientific proof or explain how it works in connection to this teaching. This is hardly the level of science to be taught as something instead or together with evolution theory. It is not sad that it is being taught in science it is damaging. It should be a subject on its own even if they want it to be taught in a scientific way.

If you do want to match religion with another course your focus should be history as that is mostly what religion is about.

Nost Gam nails it.

Cobra: I dont know much about your education system. In here kids are taught science from the 3rd class onwards and religions go under their own subjects (or if you don't belong to any religious institution, you'll get the good stuff like philosophy). I assumed you're being taught science from the get-go too.

And now, I dont have anything against people *teaching* religion, but if a teacher chooses to teach creationism in science classes, the chances are he/she is not going to teach but preach.

Still, the law is utter bs even only on the basis that creationism =/= science.

_________________
www.ceekayed.com

He does not. The law does not require equal time for evolution and creationism, but it removes the ban on teaching creationism.

It's like adding spires to the game. The choice is out there, but you do not have to use it.

So you still decide to deliberately ignore the fact that creationism isn't science. You also ignored what I said about where you'd draw the line then, or would you draw it at all? Should schools be allowed to teach anything on any classes? How about teaching legends of elveron in physics classes? Or "internet memes for dummies" in maths?

Should schools or teachers really have a right to not educate people if they so desire?

Moreover, if you are really that big on freedom of choice, it's the students who should have the freedom to choose what they want to learn.

_________________
www.ceekayed.com

I would not draw a line. Schools should have the right to teach whatever they want, and I should have the right to not attend nor pay for an organization. The contract is between the teachers and the person paying for the schooling. They do not need a 3rd party telling them what is best for them. I'm sure they will figure it out on their own.

I will agree that creationism is not science, but it's none of my business to tell others what they can and cannot learn about in their science class.
They should have the freedom to choose what they want to learn, but they are not the ones paying for the schooling. They are welcome to seek an education else where, but I should have the freedom to choose if I want to support them.

So you're arguing for fully independent and privatized education system. That stance I can understand and accept (while I don't necessarily agree that it'd be better).

However, the reality is that majority of kids go to public schools, and that majority of kids can't afford to choose any differently. Is this development still for the better in your opinion?

_________________
www.ceekayed.com