Should Creationism be taught in Public School?

Originally posted by Geolion1

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
reply to post by Geolion1

 

1.) Yes.

2.) I was taught it in school, so why not every school? But in my case, the school I went to taught all aspects including creation, evolution and the different religions. There's no reason why someone can't be given all sides of an argument and let them decide for themselves which side they want to be on.

To teach just one or just the other is dangerous and amounts to programming or brainwashing someone when not all the facts from all the sides are presented.

I agree with you that people should be taught every viewpoint and let them make the choices, the problem is that Creationism isn't a fact, which in science everything that is taught is a fact.

Hate to burst your bubble, everything in science is a THEORY. There is no such thing as a fact.

Good question, and at this point in my journey, I'd say there could be offered a choice. If the students are interested in learning of their origins, then, they could learn.

If the child is uninterested, then it isn't his time to be learning it. People don't begin seeking truth until they are good and ready.

Creationism is a journey. We are creating it now.

At some point you will understand that this journey was your own choice and an act of creation that was truly divine. The deep pain you felt when you commenced your journey alone, your journey of experience, this deep pain was at the same time a great act of creation. Because by disengaging yourselves as souls from the great whole, from Father-Mother-God, you were allowing yourselves to discover a great deal, to experience and feel a lot of things. At the current stage of your journey where there is still much inner pain, it is hard to see what the ultimate meaning of that long journey home is. But I want to assure you that you are wonderful beings of light, with great courage and great trust in the creator, otherwise you never would have commenced this journey. What I would like to remind you of is that spark of courage and creativity and light in yourselves. Feel that spark again in your heart, reconnect with it. Know that you have the power to let the child within you come to life again and let it sing and play. By looking upon your inner darkness as the calling of a lost child, I’m offering you a perspective that invites you to cherish and love yourselves as the parent you truly are.

At the beginning of your journey as a soul, you were entrusted with a lost and abandoned child, left alone in the dark. It was your challenge to deal with this emotional part of you. This part of you represents the most vital and “raw” aspect of you, the thrust of life itself. At the end of your journey, the end of this cycle of lifetimes, you will hold the hand of your inner child and see how it radiates joy, pleasure and inspired consciousness to you. It will feel safe again and will therefore show its true treasure: its ability to intensely feel and live life to the fullest. What it needs to get there is a grown-up who will take it by the hand and cherish it and inspire it with trust. And that is your mission: to be the guardian of the child within. This child has caused you pain, it has been the carrier of your emotional traumas, but at the same time it holds the greatest promise: to be your profoundest source of love, joy and creativity.

www.jeshua.net...

just to add to youre thoughts.

looking at quantum mechanics, we influence it. (looking at it, makes it as we "see") a glass of water.

a glass of water, within a solid glass, both a liquid, seen in the best small way we can.
rock is the same at that point, now go collect the atoms to make a sandgrain.
unimaginable small.

now see our galaxy as a sand , collected by you , grain.
its still a piece of rock.

now look at the time.
/.,

god? or big bang or a breathing immense creature?
we dont know, and that is something no god ever told us.
so god is by question, a word of man and nothing more.

Jewish meaning of god is worth to find out.
it means immense high mathematics, and nothing more,.

so we come back to school, and higher learning.
look around you , and learn from it.
number one rule in ancient know how.


[edit on 1-3-2010 by telfyr]
edit an e

[edit on 1-3-2010 by telfyr]

I can't see anything wrong with teaching kids about creationism but not taught it as a fact. If it was discussed in a religious or social aspect and taught that some people believe in it yes.

The only caveat I would in include in this is if it is taught then all myth should be taught also. It's not fair to the children to allow them to think only one myth exists.


If it was argued against and people strongly believed that it should be taught then I would have to ask would they also be comfortable for their kids to be schooled in Scientology in the classroom. If creationism is taught as a fact then surely they can also be taught that Xenu plonked us all around some volcanoes from his big spaceship before dropping the hydrogen bombs.

That and all other religious views.

[edit on 1-3-2010 by The Teller]

Originally posted by seattletruth

Originally posted by Geolion1

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
reply to post by Geolion1

 

1.) Yes.

2.) I was taught it in school, so why not every school? But in my case, the school I went to taught all aspects including creation, evolution and the different religions. There's no reason why someone can't be given all sides of an argument and let them decide for themselves which side they want to be on.

To teach just one or just the other is dangerous and amounts to programming or brainwashing someone when not all the facts from all the sides are presented.

I agree with you that people should be taught every viewpoint and let them make the choices, the problem is that Creationism isn't a fact, which in science everything that is taught is a fact.

Hate to burst your bubble, everything in science is a THEORY. There is no such thing as a fact.

You're both wrong and right.

Yes, everything is a theory, but you are using the scientific definition wrong.
A theory is used to show WHY something happens.
A fact is something that is true.

Let me use gravity for an example.
We know gravity is a fact because if it wasn't we would be floating right now.
But it is also a Theory(Theory of Gravity) because we don't know WHY it happens.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
reply to post by Geolion1

 

1.) Yes.

2.) I was taught it in school, so why not every school? But in my case, the school I went to taught all aspects including creation, evolution and the different religions. There's no reason why someone can't be given all sides of an argument and let them decide for themselves which side they want to be on.

To teach just one or just the other is dangerous and amounts to programming or brainwashing someone when not all the facts from all the sides are presented.

Its not a side to an argument - there is no argument about evolution. There is the scientific fact of evolution - like gravity - and then there is wild conjecture and mythological clap trap like creationism.

Creationism can be taught in schools under arts - mythologies, religion etc - it should never, ever, ever be taught as science - as it is not a science .

The day creationism is taught as a science is the same day we teach kids that gravity is caused by leprechauns.

Sorry but we do - there are thousands of theories which we know and understand - just as there is musical theory, maths, physics etc - it is from theorum.

The alternative is hypothesis - where there is no evidence only a hypothesis.

Cheers,

reply to post by Geolion1


Yes it should be taught because it is a popular topic socially speaking and will remain that way for quite sometime. However it should not be taught as science because it is only philosophically plausible at this point.

I say teach creationism in a world religions class or in a social studies or philosophy class. Science is not concerned with the spiritual world, it is inherently agnostic and must remain so.

1)yes

2)Of course creationism should be taught in school! Whether or not creationism is real, it is part of our heritage and culture, as it always will be.

Creationism is a belief, and should be taught as one. Not teaching it would simply limit perspective, especially when it is still such a hotly debated issue.

Only teaching one side of the argument, no matter how ridiculous it is, is called manipulation.

Originally posted by tim1989
Noway, not until it has been proven.

Kids go to school to get smarter, not the other way around.

I agree with the no-way, but i'll take that one step further and say if you're going to apply a broad brush to this painting, you better apply it to them all

No Big Bang
No Evolution
No Space Aliens


After all - absolutely none of it has been proven

reply to post by Geolion1


Yes I know what Creationism is.

In no way shape or form should it ever be taught in science classes. Science has to be tested and peer reviewed and is without religious bias while Creationism is, by definition, a biased viewpoint.

However I wouldn't mind it being discussed in a philosophy or comparative religion electives course or even a debate class where it is the topic of the debate...

Which Creationism? Is always my question.

Now - if there was a cultural class on the many Creationism stories - - I'd take it myself.

Originally posted by DeathShield
reply to post by Geolion1

 

Yes it should be taught because it is a popular topic socially speaking and will remain that way for quite sometime. However it should not be taught as science because it is only philosophically plausible at this point.

I say teach creationism in a world religions class or in a social studies or philosophy class. Science is not concerned with the spiritual world, it is inherently agnostic and must remain so.

Creationism is not philosophically plausible - in no way can that statement be treated with any seriousness. Philosophically speaking it is an affront. Theologically philosophically - no way.

Creationism is nothing more than the story of old testament - that is it - intelligent design is a surreptitious repositioning of bible- and as such, due to its tactics, can only be perceived as inherently untrustworthy - hence - not philosophically viable.

look at the stars at night.
and wonder what it is.
look at Hubble pictures of those stars.

you thought you knew a lot of stars, and now you se a lot more stars.
we try to look as best as we can.
and wonder how big it is.

the more we look the bigger the unives gets.
the more we understand, we grasp another view of us on earth.
the more we work on greed and "this is it" more narrow becomes our understanding.

words arranged in three sentences.
some start like the other.
most are there to be as a servant to you.

if you like it or not.
still, it is there in youre life.
its for you to do somhing with it.

nothing is hidden, we can find answers, for everything.
and still go on.
no proof of big bang no proof of an all mighty.

only questions, that our brain produce.
dna.
misillicum.


its all in a grain of sand.
or maybe its all in an fairytale.
could be youre world.

think about it.
for youre own.
not for me.

I know what it is and I don't really see the point in teaching it, although that's just my biased opinion as a school kid who was bored out of his mind by everything that wasn't mathematics and the sciences.

Teach it in religious studies or something so people know what it is, but teach it as a bad idea among a multitude and that it's unfortunate that man had to go through these bad ideas first before we actually started to understand our reality as it is.

Religion, and to a greater extent, creationism in all it's forms, was the first and worst attempt of man to explain why he existed, so it's an unavoidable topic to cover in learning of our history.

Originally posted by telfyr
no proof of big bang no proof of an all mighty.

Science puts forward theories and then tries to disprove them with counteracting evidence, not prove them (that can't logically be done) and at the end of the day, you've a range of theories that have stood unharmed in the wake of criticism. These are our best ideas, they are not arbitrary guesses. There is more reason to think a big bang happened (since we've seen the heat residue from the moments directly after the bigbang), theres non to think a wizard did it.

[edit on 1-3-2010 by Welfhard]

The separation of science and religion is very anti-traditional and would have baffled people from ancient civilizations. The ancients knew something we have forgotten: That there is only one world, and science and religion are simply different ways of understanding it.

reply to post by Welfhard


something to think about.


and still this big bang is on the same slippery slope as the ancient god and its descendants nowadays`s .
that is the grain in the soup that we as human understood long ago.

and a quite a lot of times to, we understood.
no god as a "one word" just a understanding to be questioned at all times.
that is the universe., and could be the meaning of life.

an never ending story.
on a golden brick road for every individual.
that comes to live, or life.

still the same thing in its basic.
god or its own view.
youre view on god.

nothing more.


im sorry it is as it is.
nothing more.
you think be cos of,, you got it from your childhood.

a grain of san thought to be that way in its surroundings.
in a river it get round.
in an desert it get jagged.

in an empty space it crumbles up with water.
fast space , little elemants, a lot of water.
no water above the firmanent or so?

that was an old text, proof of no knowlidge og universe.
proof of dumbing down.
no learning, just do what we tell you to do, pay 60% of youre hard worked money.

so we few build and collapsing economy.

why, its the schooling, no career, no life.
so you are thought to get a career on the collateral damage of others.
you learn it at school, certainly in usa factory`s.

still resonating in all small schools.

...

it begins with knowledge and , sad but the truth , it will end with it.
catastrophic, or peaceful .
it will end.


all of our know and think about it.
a grain of sand in a glass of water.
an fish in the earth oceans .

a thought of your bible koran kaballah etc
GODS
in their time .........


we are not even a grain of sand.
or rock
or something that stand out.

think, and see.
nothing is hidden.
even without a GOD, of any kind.!








[edit on 1-3-2010 by telfyr]

reply to post by koolerthanjesus


Laws against murder and genocide are anti-traditional, too. I guess they should go too.

We need to differentiate between science and religion, as it's impossible to learn from religion. Religion didn't bring you the computer you're looking at now, and never could.

Yes, I know what Creationism (AKA "Intelligent Design") is. No, it must not be taught in the context of science because it violates the philosophical underpinnings of the scientific method. It is based on the tautology: "everything that is was created the way it is ab nihilo." This is a roadblock to further inquiry. "Why is the sky blue?" "Because it was created that way." "Why are there stars?" "Because they were created that way." This is the antithesis of science. In order to examine the origin of phenomena, science must not concern itself with "ultimate cause." It must take an a-theistic perspective in order to investigate the effective causes. A scientist may choose to believe in a deity, but that deity cannot be used to explain phenomena because it leads to a dead end. Creationists pile logical fallacy upon logical fallacy to argue their case. If creationism is to be discussed in public schools, it needs to be taught in the context of a philosophy class as an example of invalid reasoning:

reply to post by DJW001


I was taught Creationism in school, but in my "Religious Education" class. It wasn't taught as being correct, either, just that what some Christians think happened. To me, that is the perfect (and only) place for Creationism in school.

You are absolutely 100% correct. Nicely put.