Re: What to teach the kids!!

Constitution wrote:
>
> One doesn't CLAIM to cover a topic in school and then leave out some of
> the most important aspects, right?

That's right. And as far as biology's concerned a _science_ class is
about what _science_ has discovered about human origins not the claims
of a religious text.

> If a science class is going to claim to cover "human origins" then it
> needs to do a good job and be thorough. Just like how you wouldn't
> claim to do a comprehensive study of electricity and then leave out the
> work of Ben Franklin! It dosn't mean that Ben Franklin was flawless,
> or that Michael Faraday isn't worth studying. It just means you musn't
> have a monopoly on Faraday.

Exactly so, both Franklin and Faraday were human scientists who studied
the phenomenon of electricity so it is reasonable to discuss their
work.

But a school physics class will concern itself with what is known of
electricity and the theories of how it works. It will not concern
itself with how electricity originated, whether it emerged from a Big
Bang or was created by God.

Similarly, the theory of evolution explains how life has spread and
diversified _after_ it appeared. Darwin himself made it quite clear
that his theory had nothing to say about the origins of life.

> The bible IS NOT a mere mythological blip on the human timeline, like
> many minor "religions", as atheists would like to think.
> The bible IS the oldest, most widely propagated text, EVER. Oh yes, in
> the whole known universe. It's chronology goes back to the first
> humans. And it's widely believed to be TRUE.

The Bible is just one of a number of religious texts, each of which is
believed to be true by their adherents. What arguments or evidence do
you have to persuade me that your interpretation of the Bible is better
than other versions or that Christianity is true and all the other
religions around the world, whether major or minor, are false?

> To not even include the bible in a discussion of human origins is
> IGNORANCE.

By all means include the Bible in a discussion of human origins but do
not teach it in a science class as if it were good science because it
isn't.

> You might say...
> "We can't teach that in school because its adherents are Christians,
> Jews, and Muslims who actually believe the text."
>
> but by the same logic...
> "We can't teach evolution in school because its adherents are Atheists
> who actualy believe their text books."

Christianity is the faith of Christians alone. You do not find
Muslims, Jews, Sikhs, Hindus or Buddhists worshipping the Christian God
or attending services in Christian churches. The same can be said of
all the other world's religions.

Evolution, on the other hand, is accepted as a sound theory and
employed in biological research by, for example, Christians, Muslims,
Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, agnostics and, of course, atheists.

Unlike a religion, a scientific theory depends on evidence for its
acceptance in the scientific community not on faith.

The fact is that Christianity is not a branch of biology, the Bible is
not a science textbook and it is arguably idolatrous to pretend that it
is.

> The government MUST NOT PROMOTE one major world view over the other.
> It's discriminatory, dogmatic, unconstitutional, intellectually
> incomplete, and wrong.

The US Constitution says nothing about world views, major or otherwise,
but it does prohibit the government from acting in any way that could
be construed as favouring one particular religion over all the others.

That includes encouraging the teaching of a particular Christian
creation myth in science classes when it is not science.

Ian

--
Ian H Spedding

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: 2 questions about Inteligent Design vs Evolution
    ... benevolent God as defined by Christianity. ... proven false by science. ... Does anyone else find it surprising that there "seem" to be no hard ... Suppose you start with thousands of religions, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: We can learn from Darwin
    ... It all depends, of course, on what you do with Darwin. ... You seem to be saying that science is just fine and dandy, ... other religions ) religion you are on ... Christianity already did the massive ...
    (soc.religion.christian)
  • Re: Kansas: Ottawa University planning class on intelligent design
    ... > I am fully aware that fundamentalism and Christianity are not anywhere near ... It is news if a Kansas religious school teaches that ID is not only ... One in the science classrooms ... ID apparently is accepted by some members of other religions, but, I ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Gospel of Judas
    ... more advanced in their science, mathematics, etc. ... As Rome collapsed, Christianity took control. ... Might have something to do with the contradictory rulings ... regardless of both religions' intolerance. ...
    (misc.survivalism)
  • Re: Inerrant? Christians disagree
    ... never understood the principle of inerrancy anyway. ... The crucial message of the Bible can still be ... Other religions have a crucial message as well. ... I mentioned people who turns to the holy book of *Christianity* to find ...
    (talk.origins)