10 Commandments in Alabama?

Vampire_Hunter_Bob

Cats are great
Majin Tenshi said:
Note: Stuff doesn't allways happen the way its supposed to.
Officialy lead prayer in schools = illegal
Private prayer = legal.

Some people over-react to Seperation to church and state, and think that a person must check their religion at the door when they enter a goverment affiliated building. Now, if he got up and tried to lead the class in prayer, thats a different story.

From what I remember was that the kid was praying at lunch.

Edit: are you sure it's illegal or just not allowed? I don't think anyone is going to press charges on a kid for leading a prayer in his class, or want to put him in a jail cell with a kid that just killed his parents by setting the house on fire.
 
Ack, leave for a little while and it looks like i've been repeatedly bashed. Well here we go.

What would you have taught in school? The government can not legaly use any religion's creation myth, so they go with the scientific explanation that has the greatest acceptance. Evolution doesn't severly contridict Creationism anyways. The only effect it has is saying how species change through the generations. It has nothing to do with the origins of life.

Natural selection doesn't contradict Christianity, Evolution does. Evolution, as I understand the term requires the earth to have existed for millions/billilons+ years and that is a contradiction to certain forms of creationism. Furthermore you seem to think that a science class absolutely HAS to give students some explanation for the origin of the earth and HAS to either teach creationism or evolution. There is plenty of science to be learend and plenty of other useful things to fill the ciriculum.

Creationism isn't science; if you consider it to be science then I suggest re-reading the definition or concept of science. Science is a methodology; your hypothesis is either proved or disproved through a series of observational experiements. The same cannot be said of creationism.

Natural selection can be tested and proved. Evolution (please tell me if i'm misusing the terms, but you do at least understand what i'm talking about) cannot be tested or proved for obvious reasons. Just to clarify here, what i am attacking is the teaching (as fact) that the earth originated millions or billions of years ago or that it originated as single cell organisms which evolved to all organisms alive today. If this isn't what you're defending, then i didn't phrase my response correctly and i have no fight with you.

If one wishes to propose creationism as a theory, then do so in a theology class. This theory has no place in a science classroom.

Despite what the fundamentalists say, evolution is a sound theory supported by the vast majority of the scientific community.

Fine, it's a theory, but so is evolution.
I suppose I'd be alright if it was taught as a theory. Even if creationism isn't taught as an alternative, if it's taught simply because it's commonly accepted as a theory i could accept it. I would appreciate though, if they'd include some of the arguments against it in the teaching.

It's fucking hilarious how creationists say the same, tired old shit over and over again. If you're going to slander a theory or concept, try to be more creative. Creationists still spout off the nonsense that evolution is about humans coming from monkeys. Evolutionists have never claimed this fact; instead, humans and monkeys have diverged from a common ancestor.

Ok, yes a lot of creationists run around screaming "I didn't come from a monkey, did yoooooouuuuuu come from a monkey!? wahahahahahahaha!" Don't put me as the same category with them, i don't like them either.

to add on to bok choy, There have been scientific tests to prove evolution. A few years ago, some scientists found 2 different types of guppies in the wild. One type, had a predator called Killifish, which preyed on small guppies. the other type, had a predator called a Pike-cichlid, which preyed on large guppies. What happened? type one guppies were larger than type 2 guppies, and type 2 guppies had sex when they were small (because when they got bigger, they were eaten)

They switched the guppies predators, and over 11 years, (or 30-60 generations) they found that type 1 had turned into type 2, and vice versa. Thus, proving evolution through experimentation.

Proves natural selection and adaptation are possible. Doesn't prove anything about the origin of the earth or how old the earth is.

Yes, we must remove everything that goes against any religion from all schools! So what if future generations will be at a pre-schooler's level when they're middle aged, it's all worth it to keep from hurting people's feelings. Let's be fair here, right?

If you're going to go with seperation of church and state, the gov't shouldn't be any more Athiest than it is Christian or Muslim. And oh yes of course, stop teaching evlotion and are students will all become so stupid because a proper understanding of evolution is the underlying foundation of intelligence and success. Anyway, like i said, teach it as a theory, not as fact.

Anyway, so far this has bordered on a religious debate, if at all possible i'd like to stay on topic and keep it a political debate. If anyone is really dead set on telling me how completely wrong i am and how creationism is completely impossible, maybe you could do it in PM? Thanks.
 
M

medievald00d

Guest
Note, I plan to disprove everything you said, because it goes against everything I believe in. Dont take it too personally

himura_kenshin said:
Natural selection doesn't contradict Christianity, Evolution does. Evolution, as I understand the term requires the earth to have existed for millions/billilons+ years and that is a contradiction to certain forms of creationism. Furthermore you seem to think that a science class absolutely HAS to give students some explanation for the origin of the earth and HAS to either teach creationism or evolution. There is plenty of science to be learend and plenty of other useful things to fill the ciriculum.

Natural selection is a part of evolution. Basically, a creature that has an advantage over the others in its species reproduces more, which slowly changes the species. Read my Guppy post above for this. This proves both Natural selection and evolution.
A science class teaches what it knows. That is what science is about. Pursuing questions, trying to prove a side through trial and error. This is what makes science concrete and religion abstract. Religion is about someone writing down what their god "told" them to write down. I'll leave it at that.
A good science class will NOT teach something that has not been proven. We have ideas and theorys as to how the universe was created, and how we were created (i.e. big bang theory and evolution). If we have not proved it, or it has holes in its ideas, we will not teach it. Science is about learning throught experimentation

Natural selection can be tested and proved. Evolution (please tell me if i'm misusing the terms, but you do at least understand what i'm talking about) cannot be tested or proved for obvious reasons. Just to clarify here, what i am attacking is the teaching (as fact) that the earth originated millions or billions of years ago or that it originated as single cell organisms which evolved to all organisms alive today. If this isn't what you're defending, then i didn't phrase my response correctly and i have no fight with you.
What you are talking about is a theory. We CAN make single celled organisms in the laboratory, through basic chemicals and energy. live ones. The prevailing theory is that these single celled organisms eventually became what we are today. Most Christians accept this, only that they say that this was all guided by God. Therefore, even your christian brethren accept evolution

Fine, it's a theory, but so is evolution.
I suppose I'd be alright if it was taught as a theory. Even if creationism isn't taught as an alternative, if it's taught simply because it's commonly accepted as a theory i could accept it. I would appreciate though, if they'd include some of the arguments against it in the teaching.
Bok Choy was using theory loosely, as was I. Theory, by definition, is an idea that has been proven through scientific experimentation. It can be repeated anywhere, with the same or near same results. You are confusion a math theory to a science theory. A math theory is a statement which must be proven through math (you'll learn about this in geometry). When scientists say theory, its something that is accepted by the general science community, and can be proven through experimentation. Read my guppy post for the experiment, and read up on Darwin if you need more proof.

Ok, yes a lot of creationists run around screaming "I didn't come from a monkey, did yoooooouuuuuu come from a monkey!? wahahahahahahaha!" Don't put me as the same category with them, i don't like them either.
Then do some research, and come up with your own findings. Dont believe everything your preist tells you.

Proves natural selection and adaptation are possible. Doesn't prove anything about the origin of the earth or how old the earth is.

Geology, carbon dating, and other scientific methods have been used to prove how old the earth is. There is NO definitive answer as to how the earth came to be, some theorize (as in make an idea, but has yet to be proven) that two large meteors collided with each other to create the earth. There are many other guesses, none can really be proven.

If you're going to go with seperation of church and state, the gov't shouldn't be any more Athiest than it is Christian or Muslim. And oh yes of course, stop teaching evlotion and are students will all become so stupid because a proper understanding of evolution is the underlying foundation of intelligence and success. Anyway, like i said, teach it as a theory, not as fact.

Anyway, so far this has bordered on a religious debate, if at all possible i'd like to stay on topic and keep it a political debate. If anyone is really dead set on telling me how completely wrong i am and how creationism is completely impossible, maybe you could do it in PM? Thanks.

The government is Neutral. At least it tries to be, but always bends toward the christian point. This is what pisses me off most. Evolution, is proven science, and christians (most, unlike you) accept this as fact.


Now, this post has been political, until you began spewing this text drenched in fundamentalist christian philosophy
 

Majin_Tenshi

The can opener went bye-bye...
I say let the thread mutate as it will.
Vampire_Hunter_Bob said:
Edit: are you sure it's illegal or just not allowed? I don't think anyone is going to press charges on a kid for leading a prayer in his class, or want to put him in a jail cell with a kid that just killed his parents by setting the house on fire.
Well, depends on whos doing it. Its illegal for school policy to include prayer.

himura_kenshin said:
Natural selection doesn't contradict Christianity, Evolution does. Evolution, as I understand the term requires the earth to have existed for millions/billilons+ years and that is a contradiction to certain forms of creationism. Furthermore you seem to think that a science class absolutely HAS to give students some explanation for the origin of the earth and HAS to either teach creationism or evolution. There is plenty of science to be learend and plenty of other useful things to fill the ciriculum.
Clearly, your understanding is flawed. Evolution is an explanation of how life changes. Evolution says nothing about origins. It implies that if you trace it back through time, you would end up with very primitive life billions of years ago, however, that is not part of evolution.

EVOLUTION states that through survival of the fittest, the best traits are passed down from generation to generation, resulting in slow changes to the species.

Evolution has nothing to do with saying that the earth is millions of billions of years old or whatever. Thats archeology, and geology that say that. Feel free to cut dinosaurs and rocks of of the ciriculum, I guarantee it won't go over well.

himura_kenshin said:
I suppose I'd be alright if it was taught as a theory. Even if creationism isn't taught as an alternative, if it's taught simply because it's commonly accepted as a theory i could accept it. I would appreciate though, if they'd include some of the arguments against it in the teaching.
A2 + B2 = C2
You've probably seen this before, and used a hundred times. Each time, its come out perfectly correct. However, its still a theory.

Gravity is still a theory. You can't prove it. However, it is well based enough that its as good as fact. Most science is theory, however, I don't see you complaining about the subject as a hole.

So, once again, evolution is not a theory of origins.
As far as evolution is concerned, we could have poped into existince 1000 years ago, but species would still change with each generation. The only problem would be that there wouldn't be much evidence in that 1000 years to back it up. (the fossil record seems to help quite a bit)
 
The reason i'm attacking evolution instead of science as a whole is simply because it's a particularly controversial theory. As i said before, i am not attacking adaptation of species, that would be stupid, it's been tested and proven in controlled environments. I have always heard this called natural selection. I outlined what i am attacking, and if that's not what you're defending, just ignore what i said, you're not the one i was arguing with.
 
M

medievald00d

Guest
doesnt matter, when you attack a belief, anyone who believes in it will stand up and defend their belief. After all, if i was talking to Majin, and said CHRISTIANITY SUCKS AND GOD CAN SUCK MY COCK. Then, if you were any self respecting christian, you'd begin to flame me. Its as simple as that (oh and i was using that as an example, i never blatantly say that, its very offensive)
 

Majin_Tenshi

The can opener went bye-bye...
himura_kenshin said:
The reason i'm attacking evolution instead of science as a whole is simply because it's a particularly controversial theory. As i said before, i am not attacking adaptation of species, that would be stupid, it's been tested and proven in controlled environments. I have always heard this called natural selection. I outlined what i am attacking, and if that's not what you're defending, just ignore what i said, you're not the one i was arguing with.
the only difference between adaptation of species and evolution is that evolution allows for groups of a species to be seprated and adapt differently.
 

Bok Choy

100% Leafy Goodness!
himura_kenshin said:
Evolution (please tell me if i'm misusing the terms, but you do at least understand what i'm talking about) cannot be tested or proved for obvious reasons. Just to clarify here, what i am attacking is the teaching (as fact) that the earth originated millions or billions of years ago or that it originated as single cell organisms which evolved to all organisms alive today. If this isn't what you're defending, then i didn't phrase my response correctly and i have no fight with you.Fine, it's a theory, but so is evolution.
I suppose I'd be alright if it was taught as a theory.

Let's clarify the definition of evolution since you seem to confuse its meaning with the theory of "common descent". Evolution, in the strictest biological sense, means a change in the frequencies of alleles of a population over time. This is an indisputable fact. The population will shift towards the allele combination which provides a better rate of survival or better mode of reproduction over the other combos.

What is controversial is the mechanism of how evolution occurs.

In addition, you fail to differentiate between a "theory" used in an informal context and a scientific theory.

Here is a short description of a scientific theory from dictionary.com:

A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

In a normal context, anybody can have their own personal theories of how stuff works without any regard to logic, evidence, reasoning, etc. However, to achieve a designation of theory within the scientific community requires one's observations/findings to be confirmed repeatedly by experiments, studies, etc. Predictions must be tested and validated before a hypothesis becomes a theory.

Theories do not claim to be infallible or absolute; a theory is simply the most plausible explanation of the studied phenomenon (in this case, evolution) up to date. This lack of absolute certainty, however, does not weaken its credibility. No one can claim absolute certainty (unless in a religious sense which is futile to argue with since it is based on faith rather than logic); that would be a sign of arrogance.

And creationism cannot be claimed as a scientific theory. A succinct summary from talkorigins.org:

Creationism fails to be a theory mainly because of the last point; it makes few or no specific claims about what we would expect to find, so it can't be used for anything. When it does make falsifiable predictions, they prove to be false

Since creationism doesn't even attempt to make a prediction and or a overall hypothesis regarding speciation, it does not meet the requirements of a "theory" in science. Thus, it is inappropriate to talk about creationism in a science class since it has very little to do with science.
 
I have partially backed down to the point that all i'm suggesting is that if evolution is taught in a science class (i am reffering to the teachings about the age and origin of the world ONLY here, let's keep that straight), it should be noted that it is a theory, and some of the arguments against it should also be pointed out. I don't think that's too unreasonable. And sorry medievald00d, i somehow missed your whole first post on this page, i'll respond to it now.

A good science class will NOT teach something that has not been proven. We have ideas and theorys as to how the universe was created, and how we were created (i.e. big bang theory and evolution). If we have not proved it, or it has holes in its ideas, we will not teach it. Science is about learning throught experimentation

First of all, any science class that tells their students how the earth came to be, no matter what they tell them, is telling them something that isn't proven. I believe animals adapt, and i'll even say that if the world lasts another billion years, perhaps something like evolution WILL occur, but i do not believe it is how life came to be.

What you are talking about is a theory. We CAN make single celled organisms in the laboratory, through basic chemicals and energy. live ones. The prevailing theory is that these single celled organisms eventually became what we are today. Most Christians accept this, only that they say that this was all guided by God. Therefore, even your christian brethren accept evolution

A christian who accepts single-celled organisms as the origin of all life is no more or less "my brethren" than a muslim or a hindu.

Then do some research, and come up with your own findings. Dont believe everything your preist tells you.

What makes you think I haven't? I am actually kind of insulted by this remark since i often criticize people for the same thing you just accused me of.

The government is Neutral. At least it tries to be, but always bends toward the christian point.

Punishing prayer in school and teaching evolution as fact doesn't seem much like a Christian bend to me. That's a valid statement on some points, but not all.

Now, this post has been political, until you began spewing this text drenched in fundamentalist christian philosophy

Actually no, the contect of my posts was strictly political until bok choy brought up philosophy, which is fine. I just think things are easier if we stay on the subject, but apparently i'm the only one that thinks that.
 
M

medievald00d

Guest
himura_kenshin said:
I have partially backed down to the point that all i'm suggesting is that if evolution is taught in a science class (i am reffering to the teachings about the age and origin of the world ONLY here, let's keep that straight), it should be noted that it is a theory, and some of the arguments against it should also be pointed out. I don't think that's too unreasonable. And sorry medievald00d, i somehow missed your whole first post on this page, i'll respond to it now.

Age of the world come from geology class (carbon dating, fossil records, etc), not biology (evolution). Get your sciences right. The big bang theory is an idea of how the universe began. A scientific theory. While i do not understand the big bang (mathmatically), there are scientists that can. It is the prevailing theory because it has no holes, and astronomers have found evidence of the Big Bang remains. Now, I assume you are a fundamentalist christian, which is why you brought up age. The World is NOT 6000 years old, fossil reconds go back millions of years. Ah yes, and fossils were discovered in the 19th century I believe, and they were first assumed as hoaxes.

First of all, any science class that tells their students how the earth came to be, no matter what they tell them, is telling them something that isn't proven. I believe animals adapt, and i'll even say that if the world lasts another billion years, perhaps something like evolution WILL occur, but i do not believe it is how life came to be.

By any science class, i assume you mean any subject of science. I took AP chemistry last year, got a 5 on the AP test, and a 790 on the SATII. Therefore, i believe i have the right to act knowledgeable about chemistry. I dont know where you live, but here, our chemistry classes dont tell their students how the earth came to be. Nor do our Biology or Physics classes. Please elaborate on "any science class". And you seem to not understand what has been repeated on this thread many times. CHRISTIANS ACCEPT EVOLUTION. The new christian idea is, evolution occured, but it was through god. Obviously you still dont accept evolution but thats ok. Its a scientific theory (go look that up in the dictionary, its been explained to you meany times, but you still dont seem to understand what it means)

A christian who accepts single-celled organisms as the origin of all life is no more or less "my brethren" than a muslim or a hindu.
getting touchy are we? What sect of christianity are you? I believe there are 3000 different sects of christianity, and knowing what sect you are helps my argument

What makes you think I haven't? I am actually kind of insulted by this remark since i often criticize people for the same thing you just accused me of.
What research have you done?

Punishing prayer in school and teaching evolution as fact doesn't seem much like a Christian bend to me. That's a valid statement on some points, but not all.
Punishing private prayer is also unconstitutional. I believe everyone has the right to pray to whatever god they want to, whenever they want to. Punishing forced prayer in school is different. Also, you are being fairly prejudiced in that comment. Punishing praying doesnt seem much like a christian bend? Its not much of a religious bend, not just a christian bend. But im sure you're only concerned for the christians. And once again, EVOLUTION IS A SCIENTIFIC THEORY ACCEPTED BY EVEN CHRISTIANS. If you happen to be Catholic (which would make this much easier), The pope accepts evolution.



Now I'm going to spew out some facts about Teacher led prayer
--When the Supreme Court ruled in 1963 that forced teacher-led prayer was unconstitutional, only 37% of all public schools in the US still had teacher-led prayer (DOE, 1965).
--Only 24% of all public schools in US still had Bible reading in the morning (DOE, 1974)
--violence in public schools was at its worst during the late 40's and 50's and that school-related violence began a steady decline when teacher-led prayer was fading out and finally found unconstitutional. Today, schools are statistically the safest place for children to be (DOE, 2001).
--The lowest education standards and highest high school drop-out rates are in the Bible Belt

Thats right. TEACHER LED PRAYER was found unconstitutional. Pray all the fuck you want, but when your teacher forces you to pray, then people get in trouble.
 
Ok, you seem to have misinterpreted pretty close to everything i've said.

Age of the world come from geology class (carbon dating, fossil records, etc), not biology (evolution). Get your sciences right. The big bang theory is an idea of how the universe began. A scientific theory. While i do not understand the big bang (mathmatically), there are scientists that can. It is the prevailing theory because it has no holes, and astronomers have found evidence of the Big Bang remains. Now, I assume you are a fundamentalist christian, which is why you brought up age. The World is NOT 6000 years old, fossil reconds go back millions of years. Ah yes, and fossils were discovered in the 19th century I believe, and they were first assumed as hoaxes.

The reason i'm relating origin and age to evoltion is because is the world started out early on as single celled organisms, it's heavily tied into evolution, and for that to have happened, it has to be millions or billions of years old. The age of the earth, though it wouldn't be explored in near the same depth as a geology class, could likely be mentioned in an evolution class. Evolution was taught in my school and we didn't say a thing about the origin of the earth and i was perfectly fine with that. If that's the way evolution is always taught, than perhaps someone would enlighten me as to the name of the class that teaches you that all life derived from single celled organisms or says that, for example, humans and monkeys have common ancestors. Does such a class not exists? Well that would be ackward as it would mean that this whole argument was spurred on by my misunderstanding of the term "evolution" and serves no real purpose. :-\

Fundamentalist... if i remember right that's a christian who takes everything in the Bible completely literally... hmm.. no that's not me. I go to an Assemblies of God church, though i personally differ on a few of their basic ideas. If this helps at all, a belief test on belief-net.com came up with "100% conservative protestant".

And you seem to not understand what has been repeated on this thread many times. CHRISTIANS ACCEPT EVOLUTION. The new christian idea is, evolution occured, but it was through god. Obviously you still dont accept evolution but thats ok. Its a scientific theory (go look that up in the dictionary, its been explained to you meany times, but you still dont seem to understand what it means)

Christians accept evolution? OK, well the way evolution has been depicted to me here, i suppose i do to. The understanding i had of evolution earlier, which relates to the origin of the earth, i do not accept, although some christians do.

getting touchy are we? What sect of christianity are you? I believe there are 3000 different sects of christianity, and knowing what sect you are helps my argument

Eh, that was a bit too harsh of me, i was moreso criticizing calling christians "my brethren" that i was criticizing those particular christians.

Ack, i have to go right now, but i'll be back later and respond to the rest of your post.
 

Majin_Tenshi

The can opener went bye-bye...
himura_kenshin said:
Well that would be ackward as it would mean that this whole argument was spurred on by my misunderstanding of the term "evolution" and serves no real purpose. :-\
Awkward it is for you huh?

I don't know of a class that teaches Common Decent, however, CD is was not taught to me with evolution either.

Age of the earth + Evolution =implies= Common Decent.


Could you get more information on this kid who was suspended for praying in school? I can't really argue it since I don't know anything beyond what little information I've been provided with.
 

Vampire_Hunter_Bob

Cats are great
Majin Tenshi said:
Could you get more information on this kid who was suspended for praying in school? I can't really argue it since I don't know anything beyond what little information I've been provided with.

It was a couple years ago so i doubt anyone is going to remember enough to add more to it.
 

Majin_Tenshi

The can opener went bye-bye...
Vampire_Hunter_Bob said:
But I didn't read it on the internet, i heard it on the news.
I'm sure theres an article somewhere.

( I didn't bring it up, so its not my responsibility to provide information. ;D )
 
H

Herald of Galactor

Guest
Brand spanking new and ready for controversy....

Wow. This topic's got it all-Politics, Religion, and Sex-er, okay, maybe not Sex.

Is it okay to change that? :p
 

Majin_Tenshi

The can opener went bye-bye...
Herald of Galactor said:
Brand spanking new and ready for controversy....

Wow. This topic's got it all-Politics, Religion, and Sex-er, okay, maybe not Sex.

Is it okay to change that? :p
Sorry, but sex and religion don't mix well. That, and I'm not getting any.
 

Majin_Tenshi

The can opener went bye-bye...
Vampire_Hunter_Bob said:
I wonder why?
I blame that on never leaving the house except for work and class. 'Course, every relationship ending in hatred one way or the other hasn't helped either.

Now, back to the point. Wheres that article!??!?!?!
 

Vampire_Hunter_Bob

Cats are great
Majin Tenshi said:
I blame that on never leaving the house except for work and class. 'Course, every relationship ending in hatred one way or the other hasn't helped either.

Now, back to the point. Wheres that article!??!?!?!

Not here.
 
Awkward it is for you huh?

I don't know of a class that teaches Common Decent, however, CD is was not taught to me with evolution either.

Age of the earth + Evolution =implies= Common Decent.

well i guess that wraps that up :p I was misinformed, it's not my fault! >_<

anyway i still want to take one second to respond to the rest of pheonixfenix's post. I haven't done a ton of research, i've done some for an english paper, watched some videos (and yes they were subject to Christian views, but no i do not consider them infalible) i've also debated quite a bit online. In any case, i do not believe whatever i'm told, and i'm not Catholic.

Punishing private prayer is also unconstitutional. I believe everyone has the right to pray to whatever god they want to, whenever they want to. Punishing forced prayer in school is different. Also, you are being fairly prejudiced in that comment. Punishing praying doesnt seem much like a christian bend? Its not much of a religious bend, not just a christian bend. But im sure you're only concerned for the christians.

You COMPLETELY misunderstood what i said here. I was saying that punishing VOLUNTARY prayer in schools is not favoring chrstianity and that's all i said. I was saying this to counter the claim that the government always favors christianity. If someone would've said the government always favored muslims, i could've countered it with the same example, and freedom of religion is just as important to me as it is anyone else. and i certainly never supported forced prayer in a public school.

Anyway, i'm done now :-X
 
Top Bottom