http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmer_Rouge

Look at what happened in Cambodia, where what started as a few crazy students protesting turned into a full-scale war against the government. People will fight for what they believe in, especially in the case of religion. Just look at the Crusades, Spanish Inquisition, and how under European control the Native Americans were pretty much converted to Christians or converted to corpses.

Sometimes the government has to just give in and let the people have what they want.

Perhaps that is true, but it's quite odd to apply this in this case without raising a few eyebrows. Still, I'd expect you're perplexed at this whole affair too.

To ban the teaching of a basic & quite applicable fact isn't neccesarily giving everyone what they want. But you do raise a point. The best anyone can do is to provide a decent education so that decisions are better informed & are less of a whim.

Choice in a democracy of a nature that satisfies the voter, or action to acheive an objective or avert disaster, can't rest on a whim. Doesn't have to be informed if you don't want it to be (speaking in democratic terms), but knowledge changes everything.

You may have found my previous post here disagreeable, but my point was that politics isn't through & through truth. Sure many politicians will be honest & open-minded, but take all politics with a pinch of salt.

Trends in how much we trust the media provide a window that will be exploited. SO keep your eyes open, that's all I can say.

ParallelSands wrote:

G1s26 wrote:I am going to be controversial here, and say I agree with God-mod (i think thats the right person/spelling, I'm on my phone i can't check) and that teaching both sides of the argument is the only true progression.

How is teaching something inherently unscientific and untestable a sign of progress? If anything, that's a sign of regression. Creationism should never be taught in science class.

and While I staunchly subscribe to evolution, I also feel that we should teach it alongside other opinions.

Evolution is not an opinion; it is practically scientific fact at this point. It's the only theory that accurately explains the diversity of life, among many other things. Nothing else comes close, so it should not be taught. Besides which, there are thousands of beliefs about how the world works...are you seriously suggesting we should teach all of those too?

In a religion class? Sure, why not? For the history of religious beliefs? History class. But not science.

We shouldn't enforce a person to believe whichever of the theories the government want them to believe. Let them decide for themselves, only then can they understand the full picture, and decide which view point is more plausible.

There's a major difference between teaching someone a belief, and teaching someone a scientific theory (one that is probably the most well-substantiated theory ever created).

Nowadays I think most People could be intelligent enough to realise Evolution is much more plausible. If given the choice that is, and not forced to believe something without considerring the alternatives.

Clearly not, since more than half of Americans doesn't accept evolution at all. I'm sure in other places it's even worse.

As such, in places plagued with religious fundamentalism, even teaching solely evolution in schools wouldn't help. Unfortunately the christian church was incredibly effective in it's propaganda and indoctrination in It's hayday, so effective it has become ingrained into some cultures, and become tradition to indoctrinate infants, a tradition which the Church told people, at it's beginning, that they were never to end, or even question. Impressive feat of Cultural "programming" if you ask me.

Well, that's why it's imperative that we break the church's stranglehold on scientific progress. We need to end the tradition, not give in to it.

1. So, forcing people to be indoctrinated with only one point of view, is progress? Even if Evolution is pretty well definitely right, Not allowing people, especially unscientific people, to whom it makes little difference, to make their own decision, is unfair, and beginning to go down the road of Autocracy. I think Creationism is an outdated scientific theory, which should be considerred as just that. We shouldn't just forget it, and say because it's wrong, with no evidence we'll just completely erase it from history. Science is as much about making mistakes, and working out what doesn't work, or isn't true, as much about making discoveries. These mistakes and old now-untrue theories make up as much of our knowledge as our discoveries.
2. When did i say it should be taught in science class? It should be "taught" as something to remember, something we now know to be wrong. Similar to the way Lamarckism is "taught". If people want to believe it as a part of their religion that's ultimately their choice, we shouldn't be able to force them to have to believe something they don't want to.
3. Creationism and religion in general, is an old scientific theory. It is offerring a possible way of explaining Our Universe. It has been replaced by Evolution, and modern science in general. This is because Of the better explanation evolution offers. However we should still give people the information of each idea, and the evidence for each, and then let them decide which is better. Evolution would be perceived as more accurate to the rational person, as it actually has evidence.
4. There's a difference between understanding and accepting. Many of them would be able to understand it if they wanted, and weren't forced by someone else, to only consider only one opinion. I know Many christians who can understand the concept of evolution pretty well, but still believe creationism instead. I don't know why, but there we are.
5. Merely a comment.

I am not suggesting we teach Evolution as equal with evolution. However we should atleast give people an awareness of it, and they can do whatever they want with their knowledge of creationism. It would be irresponsible as a society to simply forget our heritage, because it has been largely replaced. People can decide either way if they want to follow the reasonable Evolution theory, or put their faith in Creationism, but we should always allow it to be their decision. We should inform them of both different ideas with their observed respective merits ( or not, in the case of creationism), and how modern science views them both. This will give them the information required to make an informed decision of which is the better explanation. As the facts all point to evolution, without any external influence, a person would normally lean towards evolution and rightly so.

Just indoctrinating People with whatever opinion you feel is better, is the beginning of a rocky road.

I agree with G1s26 and God-mod. I was going to respond to ParallelSands but the former did it nicely.

In my high school we weren't taught just evolution and creationism. We were taught about all of the major religions. And they did it in a perfect fashion that I admire my school for. What they did was evolution was taught in the required Biology course, and then they taught the religions in the required World Studies class. The religions were taught just like your average study on a culture, because that is what we were doing, studing a different way of living. At the same time though it was allowing everyone to get a taste and understand other people's beliefs without any 'fire and brimstone' if you didn't believe in any of it.

I can tell you that no one walked out of either class, there was no fights or scoffs, and everyone (at least visably) was happy. Since both of these classes were required, no one side got more attention than the other. It's a system that I wouldn't change one bit.

I spent some time in a Catholic high school. What happened here was that they taught evolution. No one died and everyone was just fine with it. What they did also do, however, was ask everyone to write a short personal essay about how we felt about evolution in relation to religion. I'm fairly certain 99% of the class had no trouble understanding that evolution and religion could co-exist. And we were all 15.

I kind of wish the school would bring these essays out of whatever closet they keep them in and show them to the world.

G1s26 wrote:
1. So, forcing people to be indoctrinated with only one point of view, is progress?

Did you even read what I said? You seem to be under the assumption that evolution is a "point of view" or an "opinion," which it most certainly is not. Evolution is an scientific theory, and...well, really, do I have to repeat myself again?

ParallelSands wrote:There's a major difference between teaching someone a belief, and teaching someone a scientific theory (one that is probably the most well-substantiated theory ever created).

Even if Evolution is pretty well definitely right, Not allowing people, especially unscientific people, to whom it makes little difference, to make their own decision, is unfair, and beginning to go down the road of Autocracy.

I'm starting to think you don't actually know what a theory is. And autocracy? Are you kidding?

I think Creationism is an outdated scientific theory, which should be considerred as just that.

Correction: creationism is not a scientific theory; it is basically an hypothesis, with absoutely no evidence to back it up.

We shouldn't just forget it, and say because it's wrong, with no evidence we'll just completely erase it from history.

When did I ever say that creationism should just be forgotten? I never said anything of the sort.

Science is as much about making mistakes, and working out what doesn't work, or isn't true, as much about making discoveries. These mistakes and old now-untrue theories make up as much of our knowledge as our discoveries.

You're right, that is what science is all about. But as I already said, creationism is not science. Creationism basically amounts to "god did it," and that is entirely untestable...so please, explain to me how this is scientific?

2. When did i say it should be taught in science class?

You tell me, because I didn't say you did either. I was merely pointing out that creationism shouldn't be taught in science class.

It should be "taught" as something to remember, something we now know to be wrong. Similar to the way Lamarckism is "taught". If people want to believe it as a part of their religion that's ultimately their choice, we shouldn't be able to force them to have to believe something they don't want to.

Perhaps, but not in science.

3. Creationism and religion in general, is an old scientific theory.

No, it isn't.

It is offerring a possible way of explaining Our Universe. It has been replaced by Evolution, and modern science in general. This is because Of the better explanation evolution offers. However we should still give people the information of each idea, and the evidence for each, and then let them decide which is better. Evolution would be perceived as more accurate to the rational person, as it actually has evidence.

Okay. So I guess we should just teach every alternate idea in existence. Because, you know...that's only fair. Let's teach pagan beliefs, and Hinduism, Islam, every sect of Christianity, Shintoism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Rastafarian, Scientology, Intelligent Design, Judaism, Jainism, Deism, conspiracy theories, Norse mythology, Native American mythology...

For history class, or especially a world religion class, this isn't much of a problem, however. Just so we're clear.

(1) There's a difference between understanding and accepting. Many of them would be able to understand it if they wanted, and weren't forced by someone else, to only consider only one opinion. (2) I know Many christians who can understand the concept of evolution pretty well, but still believe creationism instead. I don't know why, but there we are.

1) Yes, perhaps. By that logic, though, we shouldn't really be able to teach anything in school, because that would be "forcing people." And I've already said that scientific theories aren't exactly opinions. But, whatever.
2) Granted, many probably can. Still, the fact remains that more than half of Americans don't accept evolution at all...which is pretty awful, honestly.

I am not suggesting we teach Evolution as equal with evolution. However we should atleast give people an awareness of it, and they can do whatever they want with their knowledge of creationism. It would be irresponsible as a society to simply forget our heritage, because it has been largely replaced. People can decide either way if they want to follow the reasonable Evolution theory, or put their faith in Creationism, but we should always allow it to be their decision. We should inform them of both different ideas with their observed respective merits ( or not, in the case of creationism), and how modern science views them both. This will give them the information required to make an informed decision of which is the better explanation. As the facts all point to evolution, without any external influence, a person would normally lean towards evolution and rightly so.

Again, I'm not...quite sure where you got that idea that I said these beliefs should be abandoned. I just think it shouldn't be taught in science class.

Just indoctrinating People with whatever opinion you feel is better, is the beginning of a rocky road.

That's true for opinions, yes.

Theory-
1.A supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, esp. one based on general principles independent of the thing to be...: "Darwin's theory of evolution"

Creationism explains how we came to be. Thus, according to Google, it is a theory. Doesn't matter if it makes sense or has evidence.

"Okay. So I guess we should just teach every alternate idea in existence. Because, you know...that's only fair. Let's teach pagan beliefs, and Hinduism, Islam, every sect of Christianity, Shintoism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Rastafarian, Scientology, Intelligent Design, Judaism, Jainism, Deism, conspiracy theories, Norse mythology, Native American mythology... "

My school does teach most of those if you take the right classes. We're already doing it just fine bud.

VampiressTrinity wrote:Theory-
1.A supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, esp. one based on general principles independent of the thing to be...: "Darwin's theory of evolution"

Creationism explains how we came to be. Thus, according to Google, it is a theory.

Scientific theory =/= theory.

A scientific theory is “a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment.” Scientists create scientific theories from hypotheses that have been corroborated through the scientific method, then gather evidence to test their accuracy. As with all forms of scientific knowledge, scientific theories are inductive in nature and do not make apodictic propositions; instead, they aim for predictive and explanatory force.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory

My school does teach most of those if you take the right classes. We're already doing it just fine bud.

Gaiz. Can we get back to the actual topic here, which is not "Is it fair to teach evolution and not teach every religion ever on the face of the Earth?" Evolution is not a religion. It's a scientific theory. Science is not a religion either (for most sane people).

Teaching evolution really doesn't have anything to do with religion and if you want to think it does, then we're just going to have to scrap science entirely because there's a whole lot more than just evolution that's in conflict with ideas in religion. Enjoy your new Middle Ages.

Alright, I'll stop.

Sorry BB. It's just the original topic doesn't offer much discussion. I don't know a lot about South Korea and there's not too much anyone can do here that would influence their decision. The only things I could think of to talk about that related was why both theories should be taught in some manner to avoid situations like Korea's.

Let's compromise and teach Scientology in schools! It sounds scientific, but is also a religion! We all get what we want!

Time to convert everyone.

If only we could get an animal's answer to these questions......but of course, that's impossible.

Still saying the decision to go back to teach in creationism is a reactionary move in response to fear.

The republicans got in bed with the religious right in the 80s because there was an untapped source of campaign workers, pledges and dollars there and waiting, and all that had to be said (at the time) was "we'll protect your churches and separatism". As the Regan and Bush tenures were extended, so did the promises to keep the coffers open.

It was not that hard to sell a policy of return to the good ol' days of family values when men were men and everybody was neighbourly and pie was a nickel. The sunbelt seniles like my mother lapped that up like cream and ran right for their checkbooks.

Because of?

Fear.

My mother's "greatest generation" (self named) is completely freaked out about what's going to happen when the hippies control Washington.

So they cling to a values system than didn't exist except in Norman Rockwell paintings for white people, and when God made us all be good.

People's values change profoundly when they are looking at death that isn't an imminent threat (you don't have the gun at your temple, but you're afraid it may happen).

So let's have another cup of coffee and let's have another piece of pie...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let's_Have_Another_Cup_of_Coffee