|
Post by truelies on Oct 5, 2007 3:33:00 GMT -5
Many religions, by their very nature want to interfere with everything and in cases such as this become catalysts for spreading ignorance. We've seen this issue increasingly becoming a problem in the US, now it seems the UK is starting to experience the same problem. For those of us without religious beliefs; how does it make you feel that someone else's beliefs, beliefs which you do not share, might negatively affect your children's or future children's education? For those of you with beliefs, but who do not believe literal interpretation of texts, how do you feel about this issue? Can anyone see a solution to this problem? We live in a world where difference isn't tolerated. The religious are trying to convert the non religious, and the non religious think the religious are ignorant. Thats just a generalisation, but like all generalisations and stereotypes, its true to an extent. To what extent you can decide. I attend a catholic highschool so obviously they try and push their beliefs, their morals and what not on us. Highschool is a time when our minds are at a very vulnerable age so its easy to be brainwashed into believing this and that. However, I do not share the same views, and when I refer to myself in terms of my beliefs, I would classify myself as non-religious. I don't think its neccesarily true to say that it would affect future children's education negatively(although it could). It's just giving children options where they can decide what is true and what is not. And if it were to mean that my (future) children became followers of whatever religion because of this, I wouldn't have a problem.
|
|
|
Post by truelies on Oct 5, 2007 3:55:43 GMT -5
^ and thats what i get for not reading the article. touche.
|
|
|
Post by halfbreed on Oct 5, 2007 6:03:25 GMT -5
I vote we ban religion!
|
|
|
Post by Ave` on Oct 5, 2007 11:23:28 GMT -5
I am wondering, is evolution taught or mentioned in schools throughout Muslim nations? Theres no use to teach something where everyone agree its BS. Its not as if you have a very good proof about evolution. Its just a matter of belief
|
|
cm
Junior Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by cm on Oct 5, 2007 11:44:19 GMT -5
Religion is good in many instances. But history proves over and over again that when you use an ancient book as advice for public policy and government, you are in for trouble.
|
|
|
Post by halfbreed on Oct 5, 2007 11:58:40 GMT -5
She must be, surely..
Ha ha.
|
|
swordcane
Junior Member
~quappuccino~
Posts: 116
|
Post by swordcane on Oct 5, 2007 12:42:34 GMT -5
Schools are dropping the Holocaust from history lessons to avoid offending Muslim pupils, a Government backed study has revealed.
It found some teachers are reluctant to cover the atrocity for fear of upsetting students whose beliefs include Holocaust denial. I'm also stuck on this.... wtf?? What PC prick thought this was a good idea? I fully support and defend anyone's right to their beliefs, but I also feel that there are lines that shouldn't be crossed, and this is one of them. Holocaust denial is despicable, and if thinking that makes me ignorant/bigoted/insensitive, so be it.
|
|
|
Post by miaim on Oct 5, 2007 19:29:42 GMT -5
Darwin's theory of evolution is a theory - as its name suggests....just like creationism is a theory too...except one is more plausible than other - but neither has been proven conclusively....
in theory, or hypothetically, nothing wrong with comparing the two: if anything, most people would see there isn't all that much difference nor are the two mutually exclusive, as long as logic and reason are applied....
but that's the basic problem, innit? logic and reason are dismissed in favour of claiming one or the other is "the truth".....
as for Holocaust denial - there is a lot of misinformation about the Holocaust that passes for fact, when the "facts" are often just estimates....not saying the Holocaust didn't happen, because it did, but here again the absence of logic and reason prevail....
but you know, most people hate having their beliefs and assumptions challenged, and often don't even know their assertions are based on beliefs - not on careful assessment of available evidence, as this section of the board proves, time and time and time again....people get upset when presented with evidence that may contradict their beliefs.....
there are many things that cannot be proven and what we claim to be "the truth" is just something we believe to be true (a perception)....but that's the price to be paid for refusing to see the world in shades of gray, or to be reasonable.....aw well.... ****shrugs****
peace
|
|
|
Post by Ave` on Oct 5, 2007 22:58:46 GMT -5
OMg Im not joking. Now you may go and kill yourself.
|
|
|
Post by halfbreed on Oct 6, 2007 0:09:40 GMT -5
OMg Im not joking. Now you may go and kill yourself. I'm confused.. are you Christian? I thought they were sposed to love their neighbours, not tell people to kill themself.
|
|
|
Post by miaim on Oct 6, 2007 3:21:00 GMT -5
"There is a certain irony in you using the words logic and reason when talking about creationism."
only if you take creationism literally - if you see creationism as a metaphor, then it's not all that fantastical.....
and i think anyone with an ounce of logic and reason can see it's metaphor and was never meant to be a literal, 'be-all-end-all' explanation of how or why the world exists... then again, the theory of evolution cannot prove how or why the earth exists, either....
if you can't see the similarities between creationism and the big bang theory....you are a lost cause to logic and reason....and people 2,000-3,000 years ago weren't as ignorant as you're trying to make them out to be....
the point being: you're just like those you criticise - because you're indulging in a literal reading and a refusal to consider any theory that may contradict or question your belief....tho i can't say i'm surprised, as you tend to do this with people's posts too....
peace
|
|
|
Post by miaim on Oct 6, 2007 5:36:31 GMT -5
" Your argument relies entirely on the premise that a God exists " no it doesn't, unless you're being a literalist, just like those you criticize.... the keyword here being: metaphor.... you're just as tunnel visioned in your determination to stick to literal readings as the literal-biblical-creationism-is-the-only-truth crowd.... for the record, i find both camps rather tiresome....and ignorant, for want of a better term... first, no where in the Bible does it say the world was created 3,000 years ago... and there is no logical rational reason to believe the week of creation is anything but metaphor: the Koran expands on this too and is actually in sync with the big bang theory....so, even 1,400 years ago, many people knew and accepted the earth wasn't created literally in a week... creationism is just a way of describing the steps of how the earth came into being: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_according_to_Genesisto sum up, i think it's an issue that could be dealt with in a History of Scientific Theory class....as none are mutually exclusive and each theory draws on evidence presented by a preceding theory..... well that, or we could simply accept we just don't know how the universe was created....but the theory of evolution crowd are loath to admit this.... peace
|
|
|
Post by miaim on Oct 6, 2007 6:06:39 GMT -5
By removing the personal god and replacing him with a metaphor you have effectively removed the need for worship, prayer, basically anything to do with religion. You just killed God. and who doesn't sound exactly like the creationists he so vehemently criticised as superstitious? see what i mean? you follow their line of logic and reasoning (it's a black-and-white, all-or-nothing, zero-sum issue)....to the letter! roflmao! peace
|
|
|
Post by miaim on Oct 6, 2007 7:34:35 GMT -5
how so? not agreeing with you does not mean someone is not debating the topic, as you often try to claim....
i even proposed a solution: admit we don't know how the universe was created and teach/discuss the different and evolving theories on how the universe was created in a History of Scientific Theory class....
i think it would also serve another purpose: dispel the blind faith some people have in certain scientific theories that have yet to be proven conclusively....
as i said, one of the problems is each camp (evolutionists and creationists) digging themselves into trenches....because both don't want to entertain questioning of their theories....
which suggests, logically and rationally, neither camp's theories hold up that well to close scrutiny....hence the fear of questioning and letting children (or indeed adults) examine and assess the evidence to make up their own minds, innit?
mind, the same could be said about the battle over the teaching of history....
peace
|
|
Ishman
Junior Member
Posts: 66
|
Post by Ishman on Oct 6, 2007 9:30:54 GMT -5
I wouldn't say that evolution and creationism need to be entirely mutually exclusive. What I mean by that is that it is possible to say that a God created the earth, or the universe, or whatever, and set the wheels in motion for creatures to evolve resulting in human beings. I also think that even if Evolution went from being a theory to scientific fact it would not disprove all religion.
As far as the place of all this in schools...I think it's crazy not to teach Evolution in science classes because it is science. I think it's crazy to teach creationism, or intelligent design, because no matter how they try to dress it up we all know it isn't science. However, I don't think it would hurt to have Comparative Religion classes where the foundations and beliefs of world's major religions are explained seeing as how the majority of wars seem to involve religion as a central factor including the current debacle in Iraq.
|
|