Forum Thread

Intelligent Design, Not in Public Schools

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 7 Posts
  • Democrat
    Beverly, MA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Let's face it, intelligent design and evolution do not go hand in hand. The mere existance of science talking about evolution is one of the strongest threats to religion in existence.

    While I honestly believe that people should be given all information and allowed to form opinions and learn on their own. I don't believe children should be taught everything. If one were to teach both evolution and intelligent design to students, it will 1) be forcing certain religious beliefs on children, 2) depending on what age they start teaching both of them, learning the two combined will be incredibly confusing.

    Therefore, only one should be taught in school and if parent's don't agree with the final outcome, well they will just have to be responsible adults and teach their kids the one they feel they should learn.

    Now, I firmly believe that evolution is the proper choice to be taught in schools. Evolution has more scientific background and without it many of the more advanced ideas that our children must learn will be lost or left til much later in life. For example: Plants are created before sunlight is created in the bible, which means that a biblical approach to science must challenge the idea of photosynthesis. In addition, Stars are created prior to the sun and moon in the bible, which means that a biblical approach to science must challenge our working cosmological model. This is just two example where the two clash and could possibly affect more advanced classes.

    Finally, our own consitution calls for a seperation of church and state. Thus teaching intelligent design crosses that line. Public school are considered part of the state.

    What do you think?
  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I agree with LLBarry.  There is no place for teaching Intelligent Design in any public school class room.  The only exception I will make is the teaching aspects of it within an optional course in World Religions and Cultures to high schoolers. Such a class should, of course, include different denominations of Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, and others as well as Native American religions to educate, but not indoctrinate. I believe too many Americans are ignorant and intolerant of religions and cultures other than their own to be able to communicate and interact effectively, not only with people of different faiths in other countries, but within our very own society.

    My mother was a very religious Evangelical Lutheran and my father was an athiest.  Although my Mom did her best to educate her children in her faith, she ultimately let each of us choose.  I never remember either my mother or my father ever ridiculing each other's beliefs or condemning anyone else's religious beliefs. In fact that was the best lesson that I learned from both of them...religious tolerance. That tolerance certainly helped me later in life as I worked and traveled in various international locations including living three years in Libya.

    But there is a distinct difference between religious tolerance and religious zealotry. I absolutely oppose any form of religious zealotry that seeks to impose one's religious doctrine on governmental policies including public school teachings. And I don't need people coming to my door to try recruit me into their religious faith.  Recently a couple of Jehovah Witnesses stopped me while I was working in my yard.  I took it upon myself to politely quiz them on why it was so important for them to recruit me as a member of their church, and why they have such a strong certitude that their "Jehovah God" was the only god. Well they never could answer my questions adequately, and we ended up in a circular argument.  They left in a huff exclaiming loudly, "You're hopeless!!"

    Perhaps I am a hopeless athiest, but I have considerably more tolerance for their faith than they do for my lack of faith. And when I see the Christian right trying to exert their beliefs onto our secular government, I am appalled at the intolerance they show to not only athiests but those of other religions, Islam in particular. Teaching of Intelligent Design is just a back door means of teaching their brand of creationism.  They can do that in their church, their private school, their home school, but never in a public class room. I will respect their beliefs as I know that gives them strength to face life's problems, but my non-beliefs should also be respected.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Dallas, TX
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Hell....even Sarah Palin said that Science should be taught in Science Class.......'nuff said.
  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Sarah Palin is just another of the long line of wacko politicians that are given more media time than they deserve. Ronald L. Numbers, in his Havard Press Review blog posting of October 1, 2008, On humans, dinosaurs, and Sarah Palin addresses Palin's proposed teaching of Intelligent Design in public schools. Extracting a few points from the Numbers article:

    "The earth was created about 6,000 years ago and that humans and dinosaurs once lived together, a belief supported, she has claimed, by evidence of human footprints inside of dinosaur tracks. A conservative Christian with strong Pentecostal and Fundamentalist leanings, Palin favors teaching creationism along with evolution. "Teach both," she once urged during her race for governor of Alaska. "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."

    "It’s unclear from her public statements just what she knows about ID except that it’s not evolution. Most of the leading advocates of ID have little use for Bible-based arguments such as those associated with young-earth creationism; their primary goal is to overthrow the centuries-old ban on supernatural explanations in science and to "reclaim science in the name of God" (source) by allowing appeals to the supernatural to count as legitimate science.


    "I’m reluctant to dismiss anyone’s religious beliefs as "malarkey," but the ID theorists insist that intelligent design is science, not religion. That’s malarkey."


    I agree with Ronald Numbers.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Dallas, TX
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    She did say in our Couric interviews that she was for teaching Science in Science class......another flip-flop, I guess. 
    ....and they said John Kerry was bad..........nothing worse than hillbillies with money.
  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    One more thought to share...

    "I'm a Christian, and I believe in parents being able to provide children with religious instruction without interference from the state. But I also believe our schools are there to teach worldly knowledge and science. I believe in evolution, and I believe there's a difference between science and faith. That doesn't make faith any less important than science. It just means they're two different things. And I think it's a mistake to try to cloud the teaching of science with theories that frankly don't hold up to scientific inquiry." -- Barack Obama, March 30, 2008

  • Independent
    Longveiw , WA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    LLBarry Wrote: Let's face it, intelligent design and evolution do not go hand in hand. The mere existance of science talking about evolution is one of the strongest threats to religion in existence.

    While I honestly believe that people should be given all information and allowed to form opinions and learn on their own. I don't believe children should be taught everything. If one were to teach both evolution and intelligent design to students, it will 1) be forcing certain religious beliefs on children, 2) depending on what age they start teaching both of them, learning the two combined will be incredibly confusing.

    Therefore, only one should be taught in school and if parent's don't agree with the final outcome, well they will just have to be responsible adults and teach their kids the one they feel they should learn.

    Now, I firmly believe that evolution is the proper choice to be taught in schools. Evolution has more scientific background and without it many of the more advanced ideas that our children must learn will be lost or left til much later in life. For example: Plants are created before sunlight is created in the bible, which means that a biblical approach to science must challenge the idea of photosynthesis. In addition, Stars are created prior to the sun and moon in the bible, which means that a biblical approach to science must challenge our working cosmological model. This is just two example where the two clash and could possibly affect more advanced classes.

    Finally, our own consitution calls for a seperation of church and state. Thus teaching intelligent design crosses that line. Public school are considered part of the state.

    What do you think?
    I think you are corect.Until we take superstition out of our eduction system and only trach the facts allowing as you say responsable adualts to interject their own take on what ussualy does not work thenwe are all quite literally heade to the hot place.I for one do not understand man odsessive need to blame unsubstanciated and unprovin beliefs that some other power greater than ourselves is the cause for this whole mess.When and just how they begin to understand that science has proven BEYOND a shadow of a doubt that we,the earth and the universe are the result of RANDOM accidental events then we will continue down this destructive path that homsapians are on now.Pleas excuse my spelling I am tired .Please feel free to contact me.Maybe if we all get together on one or two issues and make our officials comply we can show the nation and the rest of the world that science and LOGIC will take the human race further than any religion or superstition ever could/