i dont think god meant for anything to be taken literaly

i mean if you read green eggs and ham 400 times and started taking it literaly, you'd start finding some cool shit im sure

doesnt mean we are gonna change science.

[Edited on August 14, 2005 at 7:55 PM. Reason : -]

8/14/2005 7:55:41 PM

This is a good read. It's a court ruling on an Arkansas law requiring balanced treatment in the classroom between evolution and 'creation science'. It certainly answer First Amendment questions.

Quote :

"The defendants argue in their brief that evolution is, in effect, a religion, and that by teaching a religion which is contrary to some students' religious views, the State is infringing upon the student's free exercise rights under the First Amendment. Mr. Ellwanger's legislative findings, which were adopted as a finding of fact by the Arkansas Legislature in Act 590, provides: Evolution-science is contrary to the religious convictions or moral values or philosophical beliefs of many students and parents, including individuals of many different religious faiths and with diverse moral and philosophical beliefs. Act 590, &7(d). The defendants argue that the teaching of evolution alone presents both a free exercise problem and an establishment problem which can only be redressed by giving balanced treatment to creation science, which is admittedly consistent with some religious beliefs. This argument appears to have its genesis in a student note written by Mr. Wendell Bird, ``Freedom of Religion and Science Instruction in Public Schools,'' 87 Yale L.J. 515 (1978). The argument has no legal merit. If creation science is, in fact, science and not religion, as the defendants claim, it is difficult to see how the teaching of such a science could ``neutralize'' the religious nature of evolution. Assuming for the purposes of argument, however, that evolution is a religion or religious tenet, the remedy is to stop the teaching of evolution, not establish another religion in opposition to it. Yet it is clearly established in the case law, and perhaps also in common sense, that evolution is not a religion and that teaching evolution does not violate the Establishment Clause, Epperson v. Arkansas, supra, Willoughby v. Stever, No. 15574-75 (D.D.C. May 18, 1973); aff'd. 504 F.2d 271 (D.C. Cir. 1974), cert. denied , 420 U.S. 924 (1975); Wright v. Houston Indep. School Dist., 366 F. Supp. 1208 (S.D. Tex 1978), aff.d. 486 F.2d 137 (5th Cir. 1973), cert. denied 417 U.S. 969 (1974)."

Quote :

"The defendants presented Dr. Larry Parker, a specialist in devising curricula for public schools. He testified that the public school's curriculum should reflect the subjects the public wants in schools. The witness said that polls indicated a significant majority of the American public thought creation science should be taught if evolution was taught. The point of this testimony was never placed in a legal context. No doubt a sizeable majority of Americans believe in the concept of a Creator or, at least, are not opposed to the concept and see nothing wrong with teaching school children the idea. The application and content of First Amendment principles are not determined by public opinion polls or by a majority vote. Whether the proponents of Act 590 constitute the majority or the minority is quite irrelevant under a constitutional system of government. No group, no matter how large or small, may use the organs of government, of which the public schools are the most conspicuous and influential, to foist its religious beliefs on others."

http://fp.bio.utk.edu/evo-eco/resources-this_semester/McLean%20v_%20Arkansas%20Board%20of%20Education.htm

A long read, but worth it.

[Edited on August 14, 2005 at 8:17 PM. Reason : ]

8/14/2005 8:15:07 PM

aaronburro, you're a fucking moron

if you can't see it by now, you never will, if you can't even see that you're contradicting yourself at every turn, then you're as hopeless as ID

8/14/2005 8:56:17 PM

Quote :

"by teaching a religion which is contrary to some students' religious views, the State is infringing upon the student's free exercise rights under the First Amendment."

sure sure that makes sense

when they teach evolution they are very clear that its being taugt as religion doctrine and not scienfific theory

BRILLIANT!

8/14/2005 9:03:48 PM

Quote :

"atheism is a religion. and its put forth in the science classroom which is run by the gov't."

-aaronburro

Quote :

"Quote : "religion disagrees with science. you won't see in a science textbook "there is no God"" It doesn;t say it explicitly, no. But it says it implicitly. If science says "every living being is descended from one organism," then that wholly disagrees w/ the Bible where it says that Adam was the first human and that he was created from scratch. AKA, no ancestor. Thus, science disagrees w/ religion. "

-aaronburro

Quote :

"I never complained about science saying there is no god."

-aaronburro

Quote :

"atheism is a religion. and its put forth in the science classroom which is run by the gov't."

-aaronburro

Quote :

"Quote : "religion disagrees with science. you won't see in a science textbook "there is no God"" It doesn;t say it explicitly, no. But it says it implicitly. If science says "every living being is descended from one organism," then that wholly disagrees w/ the Bible where it says that Adam was the first human and that he was created from scratch. AKA, no ancestor. Thus, science disagrees w/ religion. "

-aaronburro

Quote :

"I never complained about science saying there is no god."

-aaronburro

Quote :

"atheism is a religion. and its put forth in the science classroom which is run by the gov't."

-aaronburro

Quote :

"Quote : "religion disagrees with science. you won't see in a science textbook "there is no God"" It doesn;t say it explicitly, no. But it says it implicitly. If science says "every living being is descended from one organism," then that wholly disagrees w/ the Bible where it says that Adam was the first human and that he was created from scratch. AKA, no ancestor. Thus, science disagrees w/ religion. "

-aaronburro

Quote :

"I never complained about science saying there is no god."

-aaronburro

Quote :

"atheism is a religion. and its put forth in the science classroom which is run by the gov't."

-aaronburro

Quote :

"Quote : "religion disagrees with science. you won't see in a science textbook "there is no God"" It doesn;t say it explicitly, no. But it says it implicitly. If science says "every living being is descended from one organism," then that wholly disagrees w/ the Bible where it says that Adam was the first human and that he was created from scratch. AKA, no ancestor. Thus, science disagrees w/ religion. "

-aaronburro

Quote :

"I never complained about science saying there is no god."

-aaronburro

Quote :

"atheism is a religion. and its put forth in the science classroom which is run by the gov't."

-aaronburro

Quote :

"Quote : "religion disagrees with science. you won't see in a science textbook "there is no God"" It doesn;t say it explicitly, no. But it says it implicitly. If science says "every living being is descended from one organism," then that wholly disagrees w/ the Bible where it says that Adam was the first human and that he was created from scratch. AKA, no ancestor. Thus, science disagrees w/ religion. "

-aaronburro

Quote :

"I never complained about science saying there is no god."

-aaronburro

Quote :

"atheism is a religion. and its put forth in the science classroom which is run by the gov't."

-aaronburro

Quote :

"Quote : "religion disagrees with science. you won't see in a science textbook "there is no God"" It doesn;t say it explicitly, no. But it says it implicitly. If science says "every living being is descended from one organism," then that wholly disagrees w/ the Bible where it says that Adam was the first human and that he was created from scratch. AKA, no ancestor. Thus, science disagrees w/ religion. "

-aaronburro

Quote :

"I never complained about science saying there is no god."

-aaronburro

Quote :

"atheism is a religion. and its put forth in the science classroom which is run by the gov't."

-aaronburro

Quote :

"Quote : "religion disagrees with science. you won't see in a science textbook "there is no God"" It doesn;t say it explicitly, no. But it says it implicitly. If science says "every living being is descended from one organism," then that wholly disagrees w/ the Bible where it says that Adam was the first human and that he was created from scratch. AKA, no ancestor. Thus, science disagrees w/ religion. "

-aaronburro

Quote :

"I never complained about science saying there is no god."

-aaronburro

Quote :

"atheism is a religion. and its put forth in the science classroom which is run by the gov't."

-aaronburro

Quote :

"Quote : "religion disagrees with science. you won't see in a science textbook "there is no God"" It doesn;t say it explicitly, no. But it says it implicitly. If science says "every living being is descended from one organism," then that wholly disagrees w/ the Bible where it says that Adam was the first human and that he was created from scratch. AKA, no ancestor. Thus, science disagrees w/ religion. "

-aaronburro

Quote :

"I never complained about science saying there is no god."

-aaronburro

Quote :

"atheism is a religion. and its put forth in the science classroom which is run by the gov't."

-aaronburro

Quote :

"Quote : "religion disagrees with science. you won't see in a science textbook "there is no God"" It doesn;t say it explicitly, no. But it says it implicitly. If science says "every living being is descended from one organism," then that wholly disagrees w/ the Bible where it says that Adam was the first human and that he was created from scratch. AKA, no ancestor. Thus, science disagrees w/ religion. "

-aaronburro

Quote :

"I never complained about science saying there is no god."

-aaronburro

Quote :

"atheism is a religion. and its put forth in the science classroom which is run by the gov't."

-aaronburro

Quote :

"Quote : "religion disagrees with science. you won't see in a science textbook "there is no God"" It doesn;t say it explicitly, no. But it says it implicitly. If science says "every living being is descended from one organism," then that wholly disagrees w/ the Bible where it says that Adam was the first human and that he was created from scratch. AKA, no ancestor. Thus, science disagrees w/ religion. "

-aaronburro

Quote :

"I never complained about science saying there is no god."

-aaronburro

8/14/2005 9:37:36 PM

IF YOU DONT LIKE SCIENCE THEN:

stop driving
stop using computer
stop using your AC
take off your glasses
take out your contacts
ect

otherwise, stop bitching about creationism

8/14/2005 9:46:06 PM

huh?

8/14/2005 9:47:57 PM

if someone really believe that science disproves christianity --then they should boycott science.

8/14/2005 10:05:14 PM

you make me wet, jere. besides, i think I already addressed that slipup.

8/14/2005 11:13:33 PM

Would ID be science if we understood how to do it? If we could explain how "God" created everything and had the technology to reproduce it then wouldn’t it be a science?

Before modern science Christians used to say that only "God" could create life. People use to prey to god for children. Later we learn how life is created and it is classified as science. We even took it a step further by cloning. Ever heard of “God” creating an exact replica of a person? So in terms of Christianity centuries ago we have some of the powers of "God" in modern times.

How come Christians are not debating if “God” or science determines when a child is conceived?

Also for centuries Christians said that “God” sits in heaven and heaven is in the clouds. If you were to ask a Christian in those times “If I traveled up to the clouds would I be in heaven?” the answer would be YES. This idea had to come from someone within the faith because Christians don’t get thier beliefs from non-believers. So in modern times we have proven that heaven is not in clouds or above the clouds or anywhere near the clouds.

"I saw no god nor angels whilst in orbit" Major Yuri Gagarin, first man in space.


I’m seeing a pattern here where SCIENCE is disproving ID. So each time a hole is found in the Christian beliefs they just stop believing it. Humans haven’t discovered all there is to science but we will keep moving in that direction until we either all turn Christian or become extinct.


aaronburo is a little whak

[Edited on August 15, 2005 at 12:45 AM. Reason : ..,../..,../..,../.. bc,relew;klw.]

8/15/2005 12:39:26 AM

strawman much?

8/15/2005 8:55:49 AM

I wish you would stop throwing that phrase around so carelessly.

[Edited on August 15, 2005 at 9:11 AM. Reason : ed]

8/15/2005 9:02:01 AM

wasn't there just a 5 page thread about this with the same people responding like 2 months ago? or am I crazy?

8/15/2005 9:03:51 AM

Quote :

"I wish you would stop throwing that phrase around so carelessly."

i'd quit saying it if you'd quit strawmanning much

8/15/2005 10:30:26 AM

we'd quit strawmanning if you weren't playing devil's advocate so much

8/15/2005 1:02:30 PM

I'd quit strawmanning if you'd care to clarify your arguments. We apparently keep getting it wrong, so how about enlightening us? Furthermore, stop calling strawman and proceeding not to bother explaining your actual argument.


Seriously, your arguments are about as clear as the monkey crap they're founded upon. We have a right to call them crap because you never manage to explain them with any appreciable detail.

Quote :

""What.... the fuck.... is this BULLSHIT?! You think that asserting the world is more than 6000 years old is the ONLY way science conflicts with the Bible? Science has determined with more than reasonable certainty that the earth is over 4 billion years old. It thinks this because the evidence dictates it. That it conflicts with the strict interpretation of the Bible is OF NO CONSEQUENCE. If it matters that the evidence conflicts with Christianity, then obviously religious beliefs are relevant to scientific discussion." aaronburro You really are dense, aren't you? What science itself thinks doesn't really matter to me, because science isn't the gov't. SCIENCE CLASS IN A PUBLIC SCHOOL IS."

What the heck does this mean? My point is that science, even in a government run school building, will teach science. Science says evolution is the only viable scientific theory available to explain the Earth's origins. Great, case closed, problem solved. Evolution isn't making a religious statement. It's simply the only scientific explanantion available, so we're going to teach it. Where exactly is the problem?

aaronburro

Quote :

"I just don't want the gov't teaching as fact something that goes contrary to religion. You know. 1st ammendment."

So you want astericks on material that conflicts with religion. You want religion to act as a monitoring board for school classes....

Are you English or retarded?

This is the most insane thing you've said yet, and that's saying a lot. Have you heard of separation of church and state? The opinions of religious doctrines don't count for shit in how the government operates, and that includes schools. Besides, if you want Christian doctrine to be able to do this, technically every other religion should be able to do the same.


You know, on second thought, lets take a look at this 1st ammendment....

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. "

The 1st amendment in layman's terms prevents the government from regulating religious practice in any way, shape, or form. It does not mean the government can't say or do something contrary to religious belief. Strawman much?

Wait, no, your just plain wrong.

Quote :

""So how can you possibly say that the primary purpose of evolution is nonsecular? " I never did. Strawman much?"

Yes, evolution is a secular theory developed by scientists that rightfully belongs in science textbooks. Since there is no competing scientific theory, it's the only theory taught.


Finally a good slip of the tongue, aaronburro. You're in this to get religious influence back in the classroom. Bravo on finally letting your homosexual thoughts "out of the closet." Doesn't it feel better to finally admit the real reason you're leading the thread around in circles, never truly confronting myself or anyone else making a real argument?

I'm done with this thread. aaronburro, you've led us all in circles, spewing excrement no one wants to try and understand. You can feel free to meet me IN PERSON if you want to try and explain yourself, because you are obviously unable or unwilling to do so here. I doubt however you have the balls to try and outdebate me in person, so hide behind your computer monitor and continue believing you make sense. I've run out of ways to say you don't.

Oh and suck a strawman's dick. Nice try dipshit.

[Edited on August 15, 2005 at 4:39 PM. Reason : that's it I'm outa here]

8/15/2005 4:38:18 PM

aaron has no idea what a strawman is.

8/15/2005 4:39:38 PM

A CHALLENGE.


If creationism or ID is a scientific theory, it must be falsifiable. Every scienfic theory and law is falsifiable. Its a central part of being scienfiic.




EXPLAIN an experiment or observation that would falsify creationism or ID


for example:

evolution could be falsified if the genetic drift of humans was proven to be zero.

8/15/2005 9:27:23 PM

nothing huh? and that is why ID and creationism is not science, is not truth and is...BULLSHIT

[Edited on August 16, 2005 at 12:21 AM. Reason : =]

8/16/2005 12:21:33 AM

8/20/2005 1:44:25 AM

Quote :

"Are you English or retarded?"

Can't he be both?

[Edited on August 22, 2005 at 8:16 AM. Reason : yep]

8/22/2005 8:16:18 AM

i win; all theories must be falsifiable. no creationist can explain an experiment or observation that would falsify creationism or ID.


thank you and goodnight.

[Edited on August 22, 2005 at 6:52 PM. Reason : -]

8/22/2005 6:33:47 PM

Dinosaurs were created by God, and were in the Bible.

Quote :

"The Bible's best description of a dinosaur-like animal is recorded in Job chapter 40. "Look at the behemoth, which I made along with you and which feeds on grass like an ox. What strength he has in his loins, what power in the muscles of his belly! "

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c004.html


The Bible says Noah took dinosaurs on the ark.

Quote :

"Did Noah take dinosaurs on the Ark? The Bible does not list the names of every creature on the Ark. It does say that one set of every kind of air-breathing animal was on board (Genesis 6:19-20, 7:15-16). So, dinosaurs must have been included. There is evidence that dinosaurs lived after the Flood. For instance, Job saw "behemoth" after the Flood. (Other evidences will be discussed later.)"

http://www.christiananswers.net/dinosaurs/j-ark1.html

8/30/2005 7:58:48 AM

Wait, how the fuck did Noah get velociraptors on the ark? They would have owned his shit. I've seen it happen, trust me.

8/30/2005 8:12:13 AM

Quote :

"WHO BRING THE THUNDER AND THE LIGHTNING"

8/30/2005 11:12:26 AM