A question for all a' yous' furriners

[cheerful_deviant]

There is currently a debate running in the state of Kansas regarding evolution vs. creationism in the public schools. The full story is here. The final day of the debate is covered here.

For those of you not firmiliar with the debate, it is the basic science vs. religion that has been going on for years. However, added to the mix this time, we have the proponants of "Intelligent Design", sometimes dubbed, "Creationism Lite". This is the belief that the world is to complex to have evolved on its own and had to have guidence from some some outside influence.

Mentioned in the articles I have read is refrences to the media of several other countries covering the debate. So I was wondering what any Litizens living outside the USA thought of this? Is there any kind of debate like this in any other country? What were you taught in school?

 

[elsol]

Intelligent design is actually "Okay... so creationism is fucking stupid unless you're willing to give up ALL science and the fact that man didn't just pop up 4000 years ago."

Personally, I think creationism is an insult to God's intelligence; it makes him out to be a three-year old.

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[rgraham666]

Oh Christ!

I can't stand it. Don't these fucking jihadis ever give up?

CD, here in Canada, so far as I know, we teach evolution.

But that's because we're such a multi-cultural society. If they decided to teach religion in our science classrooms, you wouldn't believe the debate over which religion.

 

[Guest]

I was taught science in school and religion at home.

Science won.

 

[Liar]

Basically, we were taught evolution and science in school. Most people are pretty secular here, but those who are not are at least not dumb enough to disregard scientce when it kicks them in the nuts.

One of my best friends is a protestant minister, whose look on the bible pretty much sums it up. The old testament is a bunch of fairy tales designed to teach people much less scientifically advanced than the average ten-year-old is today about the ways of God. So it's a collection of moralizing and sometimes eduating legends, fables and extended metaphors attempting to make what really went down understandable to antique people. If it had spoken of God's design in terms of natural selection, sub atomic physics and fractal models, noone back then would had gotten the point.

Me, I'm happily agnostic. But that is the only explanation to all the weirdness that Tha Book contains that I can buy.

 

[minsue]

I was taught science in school and religion at home.

Science won.

Exactly why so many want to remove science from the schools. (I desperately want to be joking, but I'm not.)

 

[LadyJeanne]

I went to Chicago Public schools from grade school through high school, then went to a private non-denominational college. My parents taught me very little about our religion at home, as one parent didn't believe in religion and the other couldn't explain our religion very well, though they both believe in God.

I learned a lot about religion in the schools - the Puritans, Calvin, Martin Luther, the Popes, Crusades, Holy Roman Empire, the Ottoman Empire, Greek and Roman mythology, Henry VIII and the Church of England, Spanish Inquisition, Galileo, The Last Supper, the Russian Revolution, Marx...religion figured into just about everything - English, history, art, music, science, math, philosophy, geography. I never once took a 'religion' class, but there's PLENTY of religion in schools already. Yes, I learned about creationism - not alongside Darwin in biology class, but it was certainly something every fourth grader knew about.

 

[elsol]

*shrug*

Even in catechism classes, the issue was dismissed as 'God works in mysterious ways.'

Like I said in another thread, I'm waiting for ET to come down and show me his bible.

If it matches mine, I'm joining the seminary... otherwise I'm still hoping I don't get to have a Q&A with the All-MightyTOO soon.

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[Guest]

I was taught the truth, because it's well... the truth!

How can anyone in their right minds try to argue against evolution?

It's very sad indeed when a supposedly open and free society imposes any kind of religious doctrine on the teaching of schoolkids. It's even more sad when it's done when teaching science!

I suppose I should count myself as very lucky indeed to be living in the UK. Here we are much more inclusive and much less inclined towards trying to brainwash our youth into the religious right's way of thinking.

Even religion is taught and praticed with consideration in our schools. For example: Jews, Muslims, and those of any other religion, go out of the school assemblies when prayers are said. These prayers are christian and it's understood and accepted (even advocated) that's it's wrong for those of different religions to partake in christian prayer. All kinds of other measures are in place, too, to respect the religious beliefs of others. I don't know how this is the US.

 

[patrick1]

Hallo, Lou, I fear you're a little over-optimistic about our UK system. Darwinism is part of the national curriculum but it is possible for the occasional school to teach creationism as well. Sponsored academies can. The ones funded by Peter Vardy, who made his fortune from dealing in cars, do. Here's a pro-creationism quote about it: http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2003/0923UKschools.asp

But on the whole, we do feel mystified over here by the Kansas-type controversy. To teach creationism *alongside* evolution is controversial here; to go any further would be unacceptable. I thought Henry Fonda had sorted this issue out decades ago, dammit.

While we're at it, the religious influence on US funding of international family planning projects is appalling too. Ah dear.

Patrick

 

[Guest]

Hallo, Lou, I fear you're a little over-optimistic about our UK system. Darwinism is part of the national curriculum but it is possible for the occasional school to teach creationism as well. Sponsored academies can. The ones funded by Peter Vardy, who made his fortune from dealing in cars, do. Here's a pro-creationism quote about it: http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2003/0923UKschools.asp

But on the whole, we do feel mystified over here by the Kansas-type controversy. To teach creationism *alongside* evolution is controversial here; to go any further would be unacceptable. I thought Henry Fonda had sorted this issue out decades ago, dammit.

While we're at it, the religious influence on US funding of international family planning projects is appalling too. Ah dear.

Patrick

Patrick, I hear you, but I was talking "normal" schools. The ones that 95% (or whatever the figure is) attend, i.e. state schools. The "state" teaches Darwinsim, and that's all I was getting at.

 

[ishtat]

#

In Australia all the schools teach evolution even the 32% affiliated to religious organisations.

Creationism is merely an excuse for the rest of the world to snigger at the US (including the sane bits unfortunately)

 

[lil_elvis]

One thing I'll never understand. So much of the bible deals with allegories and parables to get a point across, why is the telling of creation in Genesis taken so literally? I mean, if you don't take the 7 days as a specific amount of time, but more as the passing of time, the whole thing jives rather neatly with evolution.

 

[Guest]

One thing I'll never understand. So much of the bible deals with allegories and parables to get a point across, why is the telling of creation in Genesis taken so literally? I mean, if you don't take the 7 days as a specific amount of time, but more as the passing of time, the whole thing jives rather neatly with evolution.

Exactly! It's all sybolism and metaphor. Even Jesus and all his dudes knew that.

 

[Guest]

Exactly why so many want to remove science from the schools. (I desperately want to be joking, but I'm not.)

________

Minsue, it is so transparent, it is laughable.

The minions of the religious right and their targeted representatives, senators, and school board members will (and can) promote their agenda in this election cycle through political muscle—a force, at times, seemingly more powerful than Tatelou's truth.

It’s interesting and funny to read in the papers, but this nonsense has no legs to carry it forward except for, perhaps, in Bumfuck, Mississippi.






(Not that there's anything wrong with anal intercourse, mind you.)

 

[oggbashan]

From this side of the Atlantic, the discussions on Darwinism make the whole US sound like uneducated hicks who should be declared too incompetent to vote for the local dog-catcher. Why are they so worried that science might suggest that the Old Testament is not literally true? Is their faith THAT fragile?

The arguments sound just as stupid as the fundamentalist Mullahs of extreme Islam. They make us wonder how it was that Muslims saved and built on much of the science and culture of the Greeks and Romans before passing it back to the uneducated hicks of Western Europe.

My concern is that these people can influence the most powerful nation in the world and they have no concept of the world outside their religiously fanatical community.

Og

 

[scheherazade_79]

I went to a normal UK comprehensive, so I'm with Lou on counting myself lucky. I was taught both theories in science lessons and left to make my own mind up about which version I chose to believe. In Religious Studies, I was taught about Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism, Wicca and the Jewish religion, as well as other moral/spiritual topics such as race relations, homosexuality, abortion, meditation, substance abuse and general courtesy in society. The whole emphasis over here was (and still is) on letting individuals decide for themselves.

Although the case is probably different in specific faith schools, most comprehensives over here take a multi-cultural, multi-faith, live and let live approach to religious worship.

It shocked me a bit when an ex-girlfriend from Florida confessed that she didn't know anything about Charles Darwin or evolution. I don't understand how anyone can think it right to withold ideas and information from people. Don't we have a right to find out what's out there and decide for ourselves what we want to believe?

 

[elsol]

Uh... people... it's NOT about Creationism vs. Evolution.

We, all, know that, right? Right?

I mean why are we arguing about religion vs. science? It's really simple, because then we won't think about something important like Iraq i.e. Vietnam II.

Come on, haven't the Republicans blatantly admitted that putting the Gay marriage thing on the ballot of so many states was a political strategy to get more 'family value' voters into the booths.

Religion vs. Science is simply another way for those in power to convince those KEEPING them in power that they're actually doing something for THEM.

Plus a stupid populace maintains the status quo, and for those in power, the status quo is a good thing.

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[Guest]

Uh... people... it's NOT about Creationism vs. Evolution.

We, all, know that, right? Right?

I mean why are we arguing about religion vs. science? It's really simple, because then we won't think about something important like Iraq i.e. Vietnam II.

Come on, haven't the Republicans blatantly admitted that putting the Gay marriage thing on the ballot of so many states was a political strategy to get more 'family value' voters into the booths.

Religion vs. Science is simply another way for those in power to convince those KEEPING them in power that they're actually doing something for THEM.

Plus a stupid populace maintains the status quo, and for those in power, the status quo is a good thing.

Sincerely,
ElSol

____

Amen.

*genuflects*

 

[R. Richard]

For those of you not firmiliar with the debate, it is the basic science vs. religion that has been going on for years. However, added to the mix this time, we have the proponants of "Intelligent Design", sometimes dubbed, "Creationism Lite". This is the belief that the world is to complex to have evolved on its own and had to have guidence from some some outside influence.

When I went to school there was an attempt made to have an intelligent debate regarding the teaching of evolution versus creationism. Of course the matter of intelligent design was brought up.

Unfortunately, I destroyed the entire intelligent debate. The creationists wanted to limit their side of the discussion to just the bible. I calmly pointed out that we also needed to consider the several hundred Amerind stories of creation, not just the bible. Well, the crerationists were not going to consider the Amerind beliefs because they were just superstition. I then calmly asked how the creationists could demand consideration of their Christian ideas while automatically rejecting the religious beliefs of others. The whole thing degenerated into a near violent argument about religion that damn near descended into several fist fights.

Later attempts to substitute intelligent design were similarly frustrated by my insistance that not only the Christian God be considered, but also the Elder Gods. The people assembled were totally unwilling to consider Brahma, Odin, The Great Spirit and several others.

The simple way to deal with creationism and intelligent design is to simply insist that all known sources of creation and/or intelligent design be considered. Fair is fair!

 

[Guest]

.
.
.

The simple way to deal with creationism and intelligent design is to simply insist that all known sources of creation and/or intelligent design be considered. Fair is fair!

_____

Holy fuck, RR . . . you're a political force to be reckoned with.

 

[blackhaus7]

This is one of those times that I wish I wasn't from Kansas, because of how it makes the state look. However, this is a valueless debate. I asked several of the teachers in my school district about the change it would create. There isn't any is what they told me. Several years ago the state school board changed the requirement to add creationism as well as evolution and nothing happened because there is no text book that provides for this and additional resources are not allocated for additional materials. That is what will happen now. Policy will change, but down where the rubber meets the road, it stays the same. It has the same effect as the old universal 55 MPH law back in the '70s. 2/3 of all Kansans ignored it. Pay attention to the practical, not the policy. (Lowers the blood pressure over the long run. )

 

[gauchecritic]

Why have I not heard any religious people go the the obvious way in this debate?

Assuming that God is omnipotent then he really has no need to intelligently design anything. I go with those African(?) religions that see him as 'The Joker'. If He's the creator then He created Darwinism. He placed all those fossils and the 24 hour life cycle of whatever fly they use to tinker with heredity and evolution.

He made it all up! It really doesn't matter if Darwinism is 'true' or not because He invented it.

Explaining lightning by insisting on Thor is just as valid as explaining homo sapiens by evolution. Neither of them deny the existence of God.

Creating the world in seven days doesn't have to exclude, in fact must include all the scientific evidence of evolution.

I doubt that religionists have any real problem with evolution only with the evolutionists insistance that their scienctific beliefs are true when it is all plainly His 'joke'.

 

[minsue]

It’s interesting and funny to read in the papers, but this nonsense has no legs to carry it forward except for, perhaps, in Bumfuck, Mississippi.

I wish I could believe that.

 

[TheEarl]

I'm a firm believer in Intelligent Design myself. It's obvious that evolution occurred, yet IMHO I think there was a guiding hand behind it, ensuring that certain features survived for the grand plan.

I am always very disconcerted by the Douglas Adams quote likening belief in God to a puddle believing that it is special because the hole in which it lives fits it perfectly. It rocks my belief to think that we may be special just because that's the way things panned out and if we weren't then we wouldn't be here to observe we weren't. I'm still a believer though;There are several unexplained leaps forward in evolution as we know it and certain things which would have no evolutionary benefit until they were finished. Even the most rudimentary eye is fantastically complicated, yet a nearly evolved eye creates absolutely no evolutionary advantage that would suggest those genes would survive.

RRichard: On the subject of allowing other religions' creation beliefs to be considered as fact alongside Christianity's - you are now my idol. Pure quality.

Sheh: Religious Studies taught you about Wicca? Jesus, that's far more liberal than my school ever was. I found out about Wicca from my former Lady and Buffy the Vampire Slayer (a sterling educational resource ); I can't say I knew it existed before then.

The Earl