Creationism to get place in Wisconsin classes

[Flatlander]

I would like to see Roman, Greek, Norse and since we are dealing with a US school several of the Native American stories of creation should be added also maybe we can organize them by region North New England states learn the Mi'kmaq the Dakotas learn the Lakota myth and so on. There are hundreds more that could be taught but we will have to limit ourselves somehow other wise kids would have to go to school until they are 30 just to learn them all.

You know what? That's not a half bad idea. That may provide an interesting context for students to approach their own spirituality. I like it.

 

[MisterMike]

So if it is not science, it shouldn't be taught in schools? Guess we can lop off history and literature too then.

Learning about Creationism does not create believers. And here I thought schools were about learning yet the secularists want to keep stuff out. Interesting.

I don't see how offering such a class as an elective is harmful to our youth.

What next, ban it from college too?

 

[Feisty Mouse]

So if it is not science, it shouldn't be taught in schools? Guess we can lop off history and literature too then.

Learning about Creationism does not create believers. And here I thought schools were about learning yet the secularists want to keep stuff out. Interesting.

I don't see how offering such a class as an elective is harmful to our youth.

What next, ban it from college too?

It is being offered as science when it is not. That is the problem. There is a difference between a college person taking an elective class - on relgious studies, which I think is fascinating - rather than teaching a child who believes much of what he or she is told (from authority figures in school, for example) that creationism is science, when it is not.

Telling kids who don't know enough to question authority that creationism is science is bunk - it is a lie. Does that mean I think religion is "bad"? Certainly not. But it is being "sold" as science in this case. That devalues both.

 

[rmcrobertson]

What was described was not an, "elective," and nobody said anything--nor do they ever, it is worth noting--about banning religious ideas and even practices from schools.

What was described was imposing a right-wing, conservative Christian and ideological belief upon biology classes, where beliefs appear legitimately only as part of the process of their debunking.

One wonders why we laugh at Trofim Lysenko, who distorted Soviet biology for decades by forcing schools to teach the loony belief that acquired characteristics resulted in genetic changes, a belief that stemmed directly from Stalinist ideology.

 

[MisterMike]

What was described was not an, "elective," and nobody said anything--nor do they ever, it is worth noting--about banning religious ideas and even practices from schools.

Really, so I guess you missed the part in that same article where it mentions:

In March, the Ohio Board of Education narrowly approved a lesson plan that some critics contended opens the door to teaching creationism.

...or that whole little prayer in school thing. So who would these critics be? Little green men? You really needn't look far to see who's against even mentioning Creationism in the classroom. Try google for starters. Then have a look at your good ol' golden state.

One wonders why we laugh at Trofim Lysenko, who distorted Soviet biology for decades by forcing schools to teach the loony belief that acquired characteristics resulted in genetic changes, a belief that stemmed directly from Stalinist ideology.

Axly, one wonders why we laugh when the lefties distort their own agenda so much they get lost in it themselves. I guess Progressives see the U.S. "progressing" without religion in the classroom. Time to lump this one in with "There's no liberal biased media" and "We don't want your guns".

UG..on that note, I was watching that putrid distortion of the highest office in the country, "American President" with Sheen, Foxx, Reiner and all the rest of the clowns. The crime prevention bill line had me rolling my eyes to the back of my head. "Yes, I want to get handguns and assault weapons off the streets, and if you don't, you are on the wrong side of crime!" blah blah blah....

I guess I'm on the wrong side of education, what with my trying to open doors and not close them. Funny you mention Stalinist Soviet Union, what with all the "correct" education they wanted everyone to have.

What an agenda - remove religion and all you have left is the State.

 

[Flatlander]

What an agenda - remove religion and all you have left is the State.

But it's not really "removing" religion, Mike. Your fellow citizens would still have the right to choose and follow their own religious path.

I feel that religious education is the responsibility of the parent, not the state. I also believe that a human ought to be free to form their own opinion regarding their spirituality. State endorsement of any particular religion is irresponsible, IMO.

 

[MisterMike]

Right, but it is not an endorsement, any more than they are endorsing Shakespear. It should just be allowed to be taught.

Oh and for "no attacks on creationism"

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=519&e=4&u=/ap/evolution_debate

 

[Flatlander]

Right, but it is not an endorsement, any more than they are endorsing Shakespear. It should just be allowed to be taught.

Absolutely, as long as they teach other creation stories besides just the Christian one, to keep things diverse and colorful. They do teach Shakespeare, but they also teach Chaucer, Longfellow, and Plimpton. (Well, they did at my school, anyways....)

 

[PeachMonkey]

Right, but it is not an endorsement, any more than they are endorsing Shakespear. It should just be allowed to be taught.

Shakespeare isn't endorsed in a science class, and nor should creationism.

 

[MisterMike]

Well no kidding.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

So if it is not science, it shouldn't be taught in schools? Guess we can lop off history and literature too then.

Learning about Creationism does not create believers. And here I thought schools were about learning yet the secularists want to keep stuff out. Interesting.

I don't see how offering such a class as an elective is harmful to our youth.

What next, ban it from college too?

If it isn't science--which they pass it off as with the phrase "Creation science", then it shouldn't be taught in science classes.

You want to teach it as an elective when we have P.E. classes cut across the nation and an obesity epidemic among our children? We lag in the sciences and math among developed nations and you want to teach this?

Those that WANT creationism are teaching it to their children anyway. They want it offered as a way of cutting the legs out from mainstream scientific theories of development and as a way of evangelizing their fundamentalist beliefs.


Regards,


Steve

 

[heretic888]

Mike, the whole point of our criticisms here is that "creationism" (which would better be called "Fundamentalist Protestant Religious Beliefs on the Origin of Life") has no place in a biology classroom. It is not scientific in the slightest, and has no biological content to back up its claims.

And. c'mon, let's be honest now ---- when these guys are touting "creationism", they aren't talking about a general idea of the myriad variety of creation myths the world over (whether its the Yanomami's idea that we were born when a spear hit the moon, or the Navaho idea that we're on the back of a giant turtle, or the Hindu idea that the world was originally a giant eggshell). Nope, they're talking specifically and exclusively about the creation myth of their religion.

No matter how you attempt to rationalize or justify it, this is just another attempt by the Religious Right to force-feed their religion down everyone else's throats. One could ask why they are so freakishly frightened, so amazingly scared, of competition. Could it actually be that their religious pronouncements are so absurd that you literally have to force people to listen to them??

 

[heretic888]

Sorry. Double-post.

 

[Makalakumu]

Give me Liberty (* for religion and other important issues *) or give me Death!

In a way, as a teacher of science, I don't have a problem with holding both theories up to the light. I think the weight of evidence will bury creationism and end the debate by rejecting it as a theory. Occum's Razor anyone?

 

[Makalakumu]

Evolutionists commonly claim that evolution makes many predictions that have been found to be correct. They will cite something like antibiotic resistance in bacteria as some sort of ‘prediction’ of evolution, whereas they question the value of the creationist model in making predictions.

Well, what does creationism have to say regarding antibiotic resistance? I agree with you, Jack. Creationism is a theory. Lets put both theories to the test and see which one emerges the winner.

 

[heretic888]

Personally, I think its a bit of a stretch to call "creationism" a theory.

 

[Makalakumu]

One continues to wonder what the Big Fear is, beyond the appropriate fear of modernity and social change. Is it the bit about the human race's origins in Africa, which means...that we're all...? Is it the continuation of the old Manichean hatred of material reality, which as Augustine pointed out long ago expresses a hatred of God's works? Is it an expression of a long-standing anti-intellectualism in American society, that used to be tied to a declaration of intellectual independance from Europe but has now shriveled into this sort of stuff?

Robert, you hit the nail on the head with this. I am only inversing your responses.

The enemy of the Christian right-wing, as has often been pointed out, is the development of capitalism in the modern era. "Evolution," is merely the fall guy.

The christian right reads the same bible I read. They have found themselves in a philosophical contradiction that will land them "in hell" so they blame it on evolution. You know, its evolution that makes our society into the "everyman for himself" mess we see today.

 

[Makalakumu]

So if it is not science, it shouldn't be taught in schools? Guess we can lop off history and literature too then.

Learning about Creationism does not create believers. And here I thought schools were about learning yet the secularists want to keep stuff out. Interesting.

I don't see how offering such a class as an elective is harmful to our youth.

What next, ban it from college too?

I took a class as an undergrad in which a creationism expert and an evolution expert presented their theories side by side. I'm not sure how appropriate it would be in a high school curriculum considering the develepmental states of teenagers, but I am personally not afraid of this comparison.

 

[Makalakumu]

Personally, I think its a bit of a stretch to call "creationism" a theory.

I think we have to. There is a huge group of people in this country who are begging for debate. They have political power. I say give it to em...Ask and you shall receive...but maybe not what you were asking for.

 

[rmcrobertson]

One supposes that it would be perfectly all right to teach "creationism," in any class dealing with mythology, its origins, and its debunking.

This might include a science class, assuredly, since the proper approach would be to discuss "creationism," as an excellent illustration of a) pre-scientific thought, b) a fundamentally-different approach to reality than the scientific; c) a good key to present opposition to a rational world-view.

However, one doubts that the creationists types would be content with merely including their beliefs in any such fashion, since their point is clearly to force their beliefs down everyone else's throats and save America from godlessness and hell.