Origin Into Schools

[ClydeR]

As he explains in his video on the YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GN9zpf5cT0M), Kirk Cameron had an inspired idea for teaching students that we did not evolve from monkeys.

He discovered that Darwin's Origin of Species is not copyrighted. Kirk is going to write a new introduction to the book telling the real truth about where we came from and hand it out as part of Darwin's book. He's also going to republish the full text of Darwin's book in the same volume so that people will get the benefit of Kirk's introduction to compare to what the racist, woman hating, Hitler-connected (watch the video!) Darwin originally claimed. They will hand out free copies of the revised Book of Origin at colleges all over the country.

If you don't have time to watch Kirk's full six minute video, then watch the first few seconds where he explains how our schools have become godless because of the political climate. To illustrate, in the first 20 seconds, Kirk explains that our kids can no longer pray in public, kids cannot open a Bible in school, and the 10 Commandments can no longer be displayed in public places.

I think this is a good idea. It presents both sides of the argument and lets people make up their own minds.

[Ker_Thwap]

Holy Christ Clyde, that's an awesome idea!

He should research porno movies from the 80's as well for for copyrights. He could add introductions and sell them to alert sinners to the dangers of bad hair.

[Sweets]

Kids can pray in public. No one says they can't. Schools just aren't forcing people to do it. There is a BIG difference. Schools are neutral. If you wish to be educated in religion head to the church of your choice.

[Keller]

In the hay-day of our Republic, the church WAS the school and if you got an education, it was to be a minister.

[Seran]

I'm happy with the only real religious instruction being taught in schools come by way of teaching about the Spanish Inquisition. Clearly it's been displayed what giving too much power to a zealous, corrupt bunch can do in our government.

We don't need these same bigoted, narrow-minded and altogether schewed viewpoints being taught in our schools as if faith were a legitimate topic to be taught by biased teachers and professors. But then it isn't all faith's which are being championed by Kirk and his ilk, but rather attempting to indoctrinate as many folks into their own interpretation of Christianity.

The last thing we need is every fourth child in a Biology class whipping out his Bible and arguing vehemently with the teacher while the others attempt to get an education.

[Back]

And here I though unicorns were the way to salvation.

[Rocktar]

With all the other issues wrong with schools, the religiosity debate is wasted. Fix the other things that everyone can agree about, you know, roof leaks, buildings being close to condemned, teachers lacking basic tools like chalk and paper, teacher pay, stupid laws that get in the way of teaching (No child left behind, even if they need to be), school violence and so on.

[Daniel]

With all the other issues wrong with schools, the religiosity debate is wasted. Fix the other things that everyone can agree about, you know, roof leaks, buildings being close to condemned, teachers lacking basic tools like chalk and paper, teacher pay, stupid laws that get in the way of teaching (No child left behind, even if they need to be), school violence and so on.

That's an interesting comment for someone who rails and rails against taxes. How do you think we pay for such things?

[Gan]

Religious study really needs to be kept where it belongs, in church. This is why there is such a thing as Sunday School, where biblical application is taught in a proper setting. A public school is not a proper setting for religious study unless the study is specifically about the existence of religion from a sociological perspective.

[Rocktar]

That's an interesting comment for someone who rails and rails against taxes. How do you think we pay for such things?

More taxes aren't the answer here, too many laws requiring in some cases, one administrator per teacher just to fill out paperwork to comply with federal law is. My sister-in-law is a Special Ed/needs teacher. She is basically a highly trained babysitter that the state pays for. She doesn't have time to teach anything, she is busy changing and controlling a group of teens that are mostly about the level of 2-3 if that in mental capacity. However, since "No child left behind" the schools have to take them, have to push them though some kind of system and she, and her assistant, spend something like 50% of their day on average dealing with paperwork to comply with federal law.

The same is said for ruffians that need to be in prison or kicked out, not in school, kids that do nothing but commit crimes and waste everyone's time. Then there is the catering to every Tom, Dick and Jackass by altering the texts and curriculum to suit and not offend anyone. Followed by a teacher's union that won't let you fire non-performers and all the flat out waste on BS.

[ClydeR]

This (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmHN3JtyUXg) is really making me mad! It's some foreign sounding woman trying to rebut Kirk Cameron. I think somebody is artificially inflating her number of views to make Kirk look bad. Also, I don't believe she is the author of what she is saying. Somebody else, some liberal elite, must have written it for her.

If we're going to have a debate about what should be taught in American schools, we don't need foreigners participating in the debate. There shouldn't even be a debate.

[Rocktar]

Just because she "sounds" foreign doesn't mean she is. After all, she may be simply first generation or naturalized, in which case, she has every right. Stop being such a racist bigot.

[landy]

It's not her foreign accent that makes me laugh at her, it's the fact that she used the word "hella". Oh and Clyder, worrying about what region a person is from before listening to what they have to say, even if what they are saying has merit, is a perfect example of good Christianity. Thank you for being a shining beacon of all that Christianity represents. You make it so easy to want all religion abolished, even through violent means.

[4a6c1]

Darwin Darwin.

I've been going to a lecture series for Houston Darwin 2009 and it fucking rocks. Earlier this year I listened to a Microbial Ecologist explain how as a society we are actually building a supervirus that will kill us. Everything we do (pharmaceuticals, pesticides) builds a habitat for one to grow and it is only a matter of time until the perfect virus kills 40 percent of the worlds population. The thesis was that eventually, before the next 100 years is over, there will be an epidemic brought on by our own medical technology and nothing can stop it.

OT:

Funny Darwins name is brought into the debate against religion in so many discussions as he was a noted Anglican theologian. Doubtless his scientific experiments would have been less controversial were it not for his extensive experience with the Church.

Hating on religion, and/or, negating the historical value of religion on humanity does not a scientist make. Viewpoint objective to unsustainable variance does a scientist make. (ty, Yoda)

[Jace Solo]

There's nothing wrong with teaching evolution in school as long as there is an equal amount of time given to religions as well. I think a lot of people have issues with that, even if we do have a "religions class" where everything is equally discussed, the views of anti-religions are far more replicated than others in school systems...especially in college.

Also, it does help to show that to extreme in any direction creates huge problems, in Christianity, in Government, in recreation, in work, etc.

I think where the bottom drops out of society (and arguably where Rome's civilization imploded) was when people were encouraged to do whatever they wanted without much consequence. What any of the things mentioned before reinforce is boundaries. Our human nature leads up into trouble - Just like a child left without boundaries will ultimately lead him to BIG trouble the MAJORITY of the time.

[Androidpk]

ClydeR is your name Jonathan Swift?

[radamanthys]

I often wonder if the problem is the actual teaching of evolution, or the lack of the presentation of a separate PoV.

It's probably more 'responsible' to teach the existence of majority opposing viewpoints. Anything further gets into the realm of religious instruction, which is verboten in public schools. Possibly hand out a list of local churches?

[Ravenstorm]

Possibly hand out a list of local churches?

And mosques? Temples? Synagogues? Covens? How about we just leave science in school and let parents worry about religion. If college students want academic religious instruction, they can take courses geared to that or go to a religious university.

[radamanthys]

a.) And mosques? Temples? Synagogues? Covens?

b.) How about we just leave science in school and let parents worry about religion.

c.) If college students want academic religious instruction, they can take courses geared to that or go to a religious university.

A.) Yes. Mosques, Temples/Synogogues/Shuls, Covens... whatever religion in the area that wants to be on the list.

B.) That's basically what I said, but to go further... Why not give kids a chance to make a choice of religions other than what their parents follow?

c.) If you advocate banning them from handing these out on campus, I'm going to bolt up the local chapter of Rainbow Pride. Freedom of speech applies even if you don't agree with it, honey.

[Gan]

Including college universities in this argument is pretty stupid. Stick with primary and secondary educational institutions. Institutions where there's not an option of attendance unless the parents pay for private school or home school.

College is surely an option, as well as attendance to what colleges and their associated academia.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

I often wonder if the problem is the actual teaching of evolution, or the lack of the presentation of a separate PoV.

It's probably more 'responsible' to teach the existence of majority opposing viewpoints. Anything further gets into the realm of religious instruction, which is verboten in public schools. Possibly hand out a list of local churches?

If there were other SCIENTIFIC opposing viewpoints, by all means those should be presented.. meaning, able to be tested by the scientific method.

But religion has no place in a science class, because it can't be tested via scientific method. Even a list of local religious places to get 'alternative' viewpoints is inappropriate because it's not science.

As far as exposing children to other religions, that's fine with me-- as long as it's in the appropriate classroom setting.. i.e. a sociology class, a theology/world religions class, etc. NOT a science class.

[Gan]

winner winner

chicken dinner

[TheEschaton]

I think where the bottom drops out of society (and arguably where Rome's civilization imploded) was when people were encouraged to do whatever they wanted without much consequence.

I'm pretty sure Rome imploded due to invading Visigoths or something like that.

[Xanator]

I'm pretty sure Rome imploded due to invading Visigoths or something like that.

They were very likely struck by a plague, maybe lead poisoning, commerce/production fell apart due to a reduced workforce, the empire was divided into two unequal halves to allow for better political control, some pretty bad emperors came along...

Rome's decline took place over the course of hundreds of years, and there are hundreds of theories about what caused it. The last Emperor of the Western Empire was deposed by the Visigoths, though.

Roman people weren't really encouraged to do whatever they wanted without fear of consequence, as Rome was ruled by all-powerful emperors even after the Empire was divided into Eastern and Western halves. It's possible they did whatever they wanted without fear of consequence because the empire was stretched so ridiculously thin in its last few centuries.

Anyway, I'm not really sure I've ever felt schools should teach anything about religion outside of theology or sociology classes, and world history where it applies. When you're dealing with students of a certain age, it's fine. But when it comes to these impressionable youths everyone's talking about these days, explaining the specifics should probably be left to the people responsible for raising and entitled to offer that sort of guidance to them. I'm all for a greater understanding of world religion, but you could pretty easily save yourself an age-old debate.

The Christians get mad because you're teaching evolution and not creationism, but they'd also be pretty steamed if you were indoctrinating the children with Muslimism. Just wanna have their cake and nomnomnom.

[Latrinsorm]

As far as exposing children to other religions, that's fine with me-- as long as it's in the appropriate classroom setting.. i.e. a sociology class, a theology/world religions class, etc. NOT a science class.Did you know that theology is referred to as "the queen of the sciences"? :)

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Did you know that theology is referred to as "the queen of the sciences"? :)

I'm looking at it in context. Theology would be devoted to religion therefore religion exploration & religious alternatives to scientific theories would be appropriate.

Theology is NOT a science though, nor is anything that cannot be tested via scientific method-- information that is able to be tested via scientific method is appropriate for a science class. Everything else is not.