UK bans teaching of creationism in any school that receives public funding

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: nonspecific

I am saying that there is more to creationism and the argument for intelligent design than just the bible,do I personally believe -no,but yes it should be taught as the alternative is by know means concrete fact either.

How does this opinion relate to the OP regarding the removal of funding in UK schools for those wishing to teach creationism as a core subject please.

How is this relavant to the conversation in hand?

a reply to: nonspecific

We are talking about removing any evidence from schools of something that a great many people think is true. By doing so at the very least we lose our understanding of why people believe this. By banning this we turn from education to indoctrination. By banning anything we do. Things like this must stop. It is the equivalent of book burning.

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: grainofsand

I actually am an atheist and I was arguing hypotheticals .which evolution is just as much as creationism, your violent response to the mere suggestion of intelligent design suggests you have major issues with the God concept.

Violent response? Hahaha, what world do you live in?
...and yes of course I have issues with unsubstantiated claims of scooby-doo type mystery entities. I am not particularly gullible.

originally posted by: raxusillian
a reply to: nonspecific

We are talking about removing any evidence from schools of something that a great many people think is true. By doing so at the very least we lose our understanding of why people believe this.

I must applogise I may have misunderstood the points raised in this thread.

Please could you confirm what we are talking about, why and then make your point again please?

a reply to: nonspecific

Dude are you messing with me?

Maybe I'm just confused trying to work while i read and type in this thread.

a reply to: nonspecific

By your comments on this thread there are 20 pages of irrelevant commentary here so sorry cant help you.

originally posted by: raxusillian
a reply to: nonspecific

Dude are you messing with me?

Maybe I'm just confused trying to work while i read and type in this thread.

I assure you that there is no messing involved.

A brief synopsis of this entire thread, the opinions involved and your opinion at this point is not too much to ask for?

originally posted by: raxusillian
Maybe I'm just confused trying to work while i read and type in this thread.

Perhaps you should focus on your work instead then, and leave questions about the UK government stopping fairy tales being taught in science lessons alone?

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: nonspecific

By your comments on this thread there are 20 pages of irrelevant commentary here so sorry cant help you.

So the whole thread of 20 pages is irrelavant to you?

What is your opinion on this thread then, I assume you have gone through the whole thing and made an informed decision on this topic?

Otherwise it looks like you have just popped in to make a pre determined decision based on your own opinions?

a reply to: nonspecific

Yes I'm sorry it is....I read through the first 6 or so pages got angry responded with a bunch of crap, apologized, left, came back, and finally addressed the main topic of the thread. I would love to have the time to read everything and addressed every point here but I don't. I read and post on here as much as my time allows. I wish I had more of it. I do learn a great deal while here.

originally posted by: raxusillian
a reply to: nonspecific

Yes I'm sorry it is....I read through the first 6 or so pages got angry responded with a bunch of crap, apologized, left, came back, and finally addressed the main topic of the thread. I would love to have the time to read everything and addressed every point here but I don't. I read and post on here as much as my time allows. I wish I had more of it. I do learn a great deal while here.

So by your own admission you have not read everything that has been said here, ignored most of the comments but still feel that you can make an informed opinion on a subject that by the looks of the responses you are ill informed on?

I do not mean to speak badly about anyone but you have to admit this may be a bad idea?

originally posted by: raxusillian
a reply to: nonspecific

Yes I'm sorry it is....I read through the first 6 or so pages got angry responded with a bunch of crap, apologized, left, came back, and finally addressed the main topic of the thread. I would love to have the time to read everything and addressed every point here but I don't. I read and post on here as much as my time allows. I wish I had more of it. I do learn a great deal while here.

As a genuine question here.

Do you live in the UK?

Do your children go to school in the UK?

Do you have an issue with government funding given to schools that promote creationism in the above enviroment?

Please tell me you can say yes to at least 2 of the above issues.

a reply to: grainofsand

I will do just that long as you do not post in anything related to the US in anyway.

We are all humanity. What affects you affects me. Borders to countries should mean nothing.

a reply to: nonspecific

Please tell me you can say yes to at least 2 of the above issues.

This I think is one of humanities greatest issues. If I don't let it affect me because I don't live there, another wedge. We all should be far more connected than we are. To say that since it doesn't affect me I shouldn't get to have any opinion that sir is very sad.

originally posted by: raxusillian
a reply to: grainofsand

I will do just that long as you do not post in anything related to the US in anyway.

We are all humanity. What affects you affects me. Borders to countries should mean nothing.

The nation involved is immaterial, the understanding of the subject is.

originally posted by: ISawItFirst
I'm just glad that a majority of Americans would never elect a (professed) atheist. (Poll from one of the links shows it is the single worst quality a candidate can have in the US, as it should be)

That is just sad if true. Folks are so insecure about their beliefs that they won't even elect an atheistic president, even if his plans are good and intelligence is very high. This is why American politics are crap. Elections are popularity contests and folks vote on who is the cutest and speaks the best in front of a crowd rather than their plans and solutions to fix problems in our country.

It's also extremely sad that you value your own personal belief system higher than the future of humanity and it's exactly the same as speaking out against african american rights because they are a minority. Atheists may be in the minority, but that doesn't mean their position is wrong or that they are evil people incapable of leading a country, just because they don't agree with your COMPLETE GUESS on god and religion. Biggoted positions like that are what are destroying this country. People are still more concerned with petty differences in beliefs than uniting based on what we have in common and if religious folks weren't so quick to paint atheists as evil heathens they'd realize that both theists and atheists are soldiers of the same struggle, just with difference interpretations.

a reply to: raxusillian

You do what you like, just expect to be shot down if it is a subject matter you have less knowledge about than others.
I happily post in US based topics when I understand the subject and can pull out decent links to support my argument.

originally posted by: raxusillian
a reply to: nonspecific

Please tell me you can say yes to at least 2 of the above issues.

This I think is one of humanities greatest issues. If I don't let it affect me because I don't live there, another wedge. We all should be far more connected than we are. To say that since it doesn't affect me I shouldn't get to have any opinion that sir is very sad.

So given the context of the conversation you chose to get involved in can we assume that your answer to all of my questions is no.

Did you say anything that contributed to to the issue n question?

How did the things you wrote help?

Or are you just writing things about stuff you do not understand?

Please help me understand what you are trying to say here.

originally posted by: NavyDoc
So you say that it is a good thing without, ironically, any real evidence to support it.

So a small minority of schools who did teach it, no longer can. How can you evidence that this will change the overall picture? Leave room for what? More math? More wasted time? More staring at IPhones?

I'm an atheist, I don't give a whit about creationism, but this reeks more of pushing dislikes over what really will help.

Creationism = faith
Evolution = science

Therefor, evolution should be taught in science class and creationism/religion should be taught in religious education. It's not about banning it because they are a majority or minority. It's about the absolute FACT that science is based on facts and creationism is not. You don't teach math in phys ed, do you? Do you teach physical education in math class? It's just about putting these concepts where they belong. There is no objective evidence whatsoever for creationism or religion, so it shouldn't be taught as science. It's a very simple concept. If only one school changes their curriculum because of this law it will be a good thing. Kids don't deserve to be brainwashed, they deserve to learn about what's really out there, not complete guesswork.

Also, just because somebody is in the minority, does not mean their position is invalid or they are less important than the rest of the country. It does not mean that laws made for them don't matter. You keep saying that since it isn't many people, it's not important, but that is an inherently bigoted position. 30% of the country may be a minority but it's still A LOT of people.

But you have presented zero evidence that this time will be used for more science.

Less religious BS being taught in a science class means more time for real science. How do you not see this? Very basic logic 101 here.

People aren't saying that it's going to drastically change the world or completely reform the British education system. They are just saying it's a good thing to teach actual science in a science class. I'm not sure what your argument actually is here.

a reply to: Barcs

So what is your opinion not on the teaching of this subject but the fact that a year ago schools in the UK stopped public funding for those schools that chose to do so?

Do you agree? Disagree?

Anywhere inbetween?

I anticipate your answers.