Creationism vs Evolution

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]Jab1 wrote:
It’s a thorny issue. Some education from parents is necessary. But I’m of the opinion that a parent giving their child their religion is tantamount to abuse; children should be allowed to choose a religion when they are, say 18.
[/quote]

Education is necessary – though not a right. You will never convince me that it has to come from a particular source. The more sources the better. For that we need less regulation from government so that more choices are brought about.

You could also say children being forced to learn “civics” from a state run school is also abuse.

Freedom of choice is more than just about abortion.

42

[quote]miroku333 wrote:
ephrem wrote:
[/thread]

we still have a sub-topic to address- the freedom of parents to teach their children.
would you care to weigh in on that?[/quote]

This, I suppose, was a large part of my previous questions. Parents ARE free to teach their children. Period. You claim to have been home-schooled, so you should know this.

The caveat is that individual states have mandated standards and (I think all) have set up tests to gauge if the parent/student is meeting those standards. Teaching anything beyond what is on the test is acceptable, obviously.

The real question is, “should sates and nations mandate education?”

I would argue that, from an economic perspective as well as a social perspective, primary education should be mandated (by the state) for all individuals worldwide. In this country, because of it’s development, secondary education should be mandated as well. If we want to continue to grow economically we have to exploit our competitive advantage. This is our social capital.

Could you explain why you are against mandated education?

43

[quote]tedro wrote:
Hopefully someday all people will receive the same education and we can rid ourselves of the obvious ignorance of dissenters.

Comrade Tedro [/quote]

I thought you might be serious until I saw the “comrade” part.

44

[quote]Makavali wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
I see no need to compare magic to science.

Regardless, nice acting.

right, you know, I mean what was Darwin thinking? Sheesh - animals magically transitioning from one species to another without leaving any inter-stage hybrid-species to be found.

Surprised the hell out of the first wombat when it morphed into the kangaroo - it tried and tried to get its mate to let it back in the den - but noooo - no magically-changed roo was getting into her bed no matter how big his feet were . . . .

I am seriously insane - I need meds . . .

I’m pretty sure evolution didn’t happen overnight.[/quote]

Are you sure? - I mean it’s possible right? that’s the whole premise behind evolution - the greater possibility, after all. It would explain the Cambrian Explosion . . .

How do you evolutionists know that it didn’t - I mean it could be like spontaneous combustion - one day, for inexplicable reasons half of the kitten population suddenly developed a strain of the flu virus we would call bear flu and then morphed into polar bear cubs and moved north to Alaska . . . it would explain the lack of inter-species fossils right?

I like the idea of an alligator covered in strange purple warts jumping up to catch a bird and morphing into a pig . . .surprised the hell out of everyone at the watering hole just before the orangutan morphs into a lion and eats the pig . . .(that’s why the next alligator planned ahead and kept his teeth as tusks . . . and that’s why there are warthogs in Africa) . .

45

[quote]CrewPierce wrote:
How do creationists explain the fossils we have that show species evolve (serious question)?

Personally I believe that God created the universe but that species have evolved all themselves. I kinda doubt he would take the time to create this much diversity on our planet alone, let alone if there is anything else out there.[/quote]

I’d like to see one of those, please?

Why - does He have a lot of other things to do? Too busy with Pluto’s planetary status to mess with bio-diversity on ours?

46

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
CrewPierce wrote:
How do creationists explain the fossils we have that show species evolve (serious question)?

Personally I believe that God created the universe but that species have evolved all themselves. I kinda doubt he would take the time to create this much diversity on our planet alone, let alone if there is anything else out there.

I’d like to see one of those, please?

Why - does He have a lot of other things to do? Too busy with Pluto’s planetary status to mess with bio-diversity on ours?[/quote]

I would say sorting out souls is a pretty demanding job numb nuts.

47

[quote]ephrem wrote:
…a lot of time has passed and we’re damn lucky to find examples of intermediate fossils at all, but they’re there allright. This is perhaps the most famous of them all:[/quote]

Right . . . the Archeopteryx . . .the one that a leading world authority on birds and an evolutionist at UNC (Dr. Feducia -i think was his name)has definitively identified a being a perching bird, not a earth-bound feathered dinosaur?

48

[quote]ephrem wrote:
…this is nice:[/quote]

My collection is better

49

[quote]tedro wrote:

Seriously, who in their right mind would leave parents as the sole guiding force of a child’s fragile mind? I think we need to name a special department that will determine exactly what and when children should be taught. Hopefully someday all people will receive the same education and we can rid ourselves of the obvious ignorance of dissenters.

Comrade Tedro [/quote]

LOL! that’s where we’re headed…

50

[quote]ephrem wrote:
…it’s small but it looks like a thumb on a horse…[/quote]

Well, I tried grafting on the whole hand, but the horse said he thought that would look stupid -so we went with the thumb attachment so that he could finally flick those pesky flies off his nose . . .yep, he was hoping it would catch on and all of his kids when develop them naturally - so far, no luck. He is just an kewl anomaly -

51

[quote]ephrem wrote:
miroku333 wrote:
ephrem wrote:
[/thread]

we still have a sub-topic to address- the freedom of parents to teach their children.
would you care to weigh in on that?

…many parents are incapable of reasing their offspring properly, i’m even less confident they’ll do a better job at schooling them. A country should think hard if they want a significant amount of children be educated outside of a general curriculum that ensures a broad exposure to information. That is to say, assuming that general curriculum is of quality ofcourse…

…should they have the freedom? In special cases they should, not as a rule though…

[/quote]

I was pretty sure I disagreed with you about a lot of things - but this is the first time I find myself seriously not liking you - are you intimating that governments have an overriding interest in enforcing education that they deem appropriate upon families who may not agree with them?

52

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
ephrem wrote:
…a lot of time has passed and we’re damn lucky to find examples of intermediate fossils at all, but they’re there allright. This is perhaps the most famous of them all:

Right . . . the Archeopteryx . . .the one that a leading world authority on birds and an evolutionist at UNC (Dr. Feducia -i think was his name)has definitively identified a being a perching bird, not a earth-bound feathered dinosaur?[/quote]

…link please?

53

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
miroku333 wrote:
ephrem wrote:
[/thread]

we still have a sub-topic to address- the freedom of parents to teach their children.
would you care to weigh in on that?

This, I suppose, was a large part of my previous questions. Parents ARE free to teach their children. Period. You claim to have been home-schooled, so you should know this.

The caveat is that individual states have mandated standards and (I think all) have set up tests to gauge if the parent/student is meeting those standards. Teaching anything beyond what is on the test is acceptable, obviously.

The real question is, “should sates and nations mandate education?”

I would argue that, from an economic perspective as well as a social perspective, primary education should be mandated (by the state) for all individuals worldwide. In this country, because of it’s development, secondary education should be mandated as well. If we want to continue to grow economically we have to exploit our competitive advantage. This is our social capital.

Could you explain why you are against mandated education? [/quote]

well, I’m opposed to mandated education primarily because I’m opposed to mandated anything.

it is my opinion that individuals should be allowed to pursue their own interests, free from restrictions that require knowledge in a certain area - to be qualified for a degree in another field.
creativity is squelched and a love for learning is discouraged when one is coerced into memorizing information about things which hold no interest for them - for the sake of passing or graduating.
obviously it would be in one’s best interest to learn things that would help them interact productively with others, but not because someone else says they should.

Gambit, from your perspective of global economic growth - I can see your point completely.
I am in favor of changing the entire “system” rather than succumbing to majority rule.
in short, abolition of the state.

but again, playing by the current set of rules - yours is a very logical conclusion.

54

[quote]Jab1 wrote:
miroku333 wrote:
ephrem wrote:
[/thread]

we still have a sub-topic to address- the freedom of parents to teach their children.
would you care to weigh in on that?

It’s a thorny issue. Some education from parents is necessary. But I’m of the opinion that a parent giving their child their religion is tantamount to abuse; children should be allowed to choose a religion when they are, say 18.

So to stay consistent with this, I think that parents obviously need freedoms to teach children, but an intelligent and compulsory education system of some sort, outside of parents is necessary. Children need access to facilities for teaching sciences and other subjects that parents simply can’t provide.

It is clear that something in the US education system is failing judging by how many people think creationism is even a possibility.

Parents need to teach children basic things, but terms of an academic education I think that parents should be supplementary and reinforcing, rather than the sole guiding force.[/quote]

You’re kidding too right? Please tell me I am not understanding you guys correctly. You are not advocating that the government gets to determine what should or should not be taught to a man’s offspring regardless of his beliefs or standards?

Welcome, to the fourth reich - I’ve been telling people for years that it is not the right that we have to worry about introducing the next totalitarian regime - but the left and it’s anti-religion, anti-family, anti-morality agenda that will foist the next oppression of man.

55

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
ephrem wrote:
…this is nice:

My collection is better[/quote]

lmao!

56

[quote]tedro wrote:

Exactly. Religion is the root of all evil. A compulsory education system, funded of course by the government, could completely eliminate any mention of God in the schools, thus silencing any dissent to evolution and other popular scientific theories.

We all know parents may be able to teach their children to read and write and do basic arithmetic, but I can only imagine somebody like HH teaching his children algebra. What a joke! If we could only ascertain that public teachers attend government funded schools where they learn everything that needs to be passed on to today’s youth we wouldn’t have any silly litte kids running around proclaiming that a higher being may have played a helping hand in our existence.

Seriously, who in their right mind would leave parents as the sole guiding force of a child’s fragile mind? I think we need to name a special department that will determine exactly what and when children should be taught. Hopefully someday all people will receive the same education and we can rid ourselves of the obvious ignorance of dissenters.

Comrade Tedro [/quote]

wow . . . you’re scary

57

[quote]CrewPierce wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
CrewPierce wrote:
How do creationists explain the fossils we have that show species evolve (serious question)?

Personally I believe that God created the universe but that species have evolved all themselves. I kinda doubt he would take the time to create this much diversity on our planet alone, let alone if there is anything else out there.

I’d like to see one of those, please?

Why - does He have a lot of other things to do? Too busy with Pluto’s planetary status to mess with bio-diversity on ours?

I would say sorting out souls is a pretty demanding job numb nuts.[/quote]

Nope, I checked with a hammer - not numb at all . . well, now they’re bruised and aching . . .

I apologize if my facetiousness interfered with your conversation . . . my point was why couldn’t he have created a huge amount of biodiversity and then let nature take its course in subsequent generations (where would one draw a line a say this is where God stopped creating?)

58

[quote]ephrem wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
ephrem wrote:
…a lot of time has passed and we’re damn lucky to find examples of intermediate fossils at all, but they’re there allright. This is perhaps the most famous of them all:

Right . . . the Archeopteryx . . .the one that a leading world authority on birds and an evolutionist at UNC (Dr. Feducia -i think was his name)has definitively identified a being a perching bird, not a earth-bound feathered dinosaur?

…link please?

[/quote]

Feduccia, A.; cited in V. Morell, ?Archaeopteryx: Early Bird Catches a Can of Worms,? Science 259(5096):764?65, 5 February, 1993.

59

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
CrewPierce wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
CrewPierce wrote:
How do creationists explain the fossils we have that show species evolve (serious question)?

Personally I believe that God created the universe but that species have evolved all themselves. I kinda doubt he would take the time to create this much diversity on our planet alone, let alone if there is anything else out there.

I’d like to see one of those, please?

Why - does He have a lot of other things to do? Too busy with Pluto’s planetary status to mess with bio-diversity on ours?

I would say sorting out souls is a pretty demanding job numb nuts.

Nope, I checked with a hammer - not numb at all . . well, now they’re bruised and aching . . .

I apologize if my facetiousness interfered with your conversation . . . my point was why couldn’t he have created a huge amount of biodiversity and then let nature take its course in subsequent generations (where would one draw a line a say this is where God stopped creating?)[/quote]

I will not even begin to pretend that I could figure out where he left off and let nature run it’s course. I guess that will be my first question when I die.

I just don’t happen to buy into the whole adam and eve thing but that’s just me.

60

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
ephrem wrote:
miroku333 wrote:
ephrem wrote:
[/thread]

we still have a sub-topic to address- the freedom of parents to teach their children.
would you care to weigh in on that?

…many parents are incapable of reasing their offspring properly, i’m even less confident they’ll do a better job at schooling them. A country should think hard if they want a significant amount of children be educated outside of a general curriculum that ensures a broad exposure to information. That is to say, assuming that general curriculum is of quality ofcourse…

…should they have the freedom? In special cases they should, not as a rule though…

I was pretty sure I disagreed with you about a lot of things - but this is the first time I find myself seriously not liking you - are you intimating that governments have an overriding interest in enforcing education that they deem appropriate upon families who may not agree with them?

[/quote]

Reading Ephrem’s posts for some reason makes me feel like Omega Man.