McCain's VP Wants Creationism Taught in School

Captain_Tea said:
Ceationism is the wrong word. Inteligent design should be taught as an alternate "theory". There is no need for a religious brand. All major religions have a "creation" story, you can propose creation without calling it christian. If a student chooses to embrace the intelligent design theory it could be their 1st step toward choosing Christ as their savior and lord.
Click to expand...
The article used creationism, not intelligent design, so that is the word I will run with. Also, why would you want the schools to construct the Christian values for your kids? Isn't that more dangerous than them leaving well enough alone? They could be using Catholic analogies, Lutheran or Episcopalian analogies or values and you could be a Baptist or a Presbyterian and not share those views at all!

This is why we have separation of church and state.

HCS said it the best.

It is not their job. It's the parents.
 
Last edited:
Quite honestly, if schools simply also spent some time teaching about the wealth of evidence that is contrary to the typical evolution theory that is normally taught, I'd be happy. It would cause the students to truly think scientifically about the subject. It would cause them to see why a theory is simply that...a theory and does not cover all aspects of the evidence available.
 
That is the approach I would prefer. Present it as what it is...a theory. Then, allow the students to think objectively about it and form their own opinions. If the school is also willing to objectively present other theories, then that's a bonus.

Creationism itself (or intelligent design, if you prefer) tends to be tied to closely to religious beliefs for it to be taught objectively in a school environment, unfortunately, and I would prefer for the school system to stay out of that. Moral and religious education for the child is my job, along with my pastor and my church.
 
I won't get into the subject to much. Just know that I am definitely for having Creationism taught in school. I find it really funny to see people saying millions of years.. AND that there is so much more evidence.. which, quite to the contrary, there is more evidence for God creating the Earth and all that good stuff.. but like I said, I'm not going to get into this. But I should think that any teacher, or anyone in general should know this

Matthew 18:6 (King James Version) said:
But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
Click to expand...

Dictionary.com said:
Offend:
1. to irritate, annoy, or anger; cause resentful displeasure in: Even the hint of prejudice offends me.
2. to affect (the sense, taste, etc.) disagreeably.
3. to violate or transgress (a criminal, religious, or moral law).
4. to hurt or cause pain to.
5. (in Biblical use) to cause to fall into sinful ways.
–verb (used without object)
6. to cause resentful displeasure; irritate, annoy, or anger: a remark so thoughtless it can only offend.
7. to err in conduct; commit a sin, crime, or fault.
Click to expand...

Evolution has caused many to doubt their faith and keep people from God. My self included.

Just wanted to throw that out there. And I do believe that if you do support Evo being taught in school you might have some questions to answer. But that is not my call and I certainly do not want to ask nor answer those questions.
 
Schools are "supposed" to teach people HOW to think...NOT, WHAT to think.....if they are doing their job right imo.
 
Captain_Tea said:
Unless kids are being taught to think for themselves and draw their own conclusions, what's the difference?
Click to expand...


HOW: meaning the steps to gathering evidence up to making your own conclusion

vs.

WHAT: meaning based on what the teacher told you, information they supplied you with, this is the conclusion you should come to....
 
Goblit said:
HOW: meaning the steps to gathering evidence up to making your own conclusion

vs.

WHAT: meaning based on what the teacher told you, information they supplied you with, this is the conclusion you should come to....
Click to expand...

Exactly my point!!! The US public school system has become less about teaching and more about indoctrinating kids to believe certain things and think a certain way.
 
From the perspective of someone in the classroom, teachers spend most of their time teaching conformity (sit down, stand up, move here, move there), keep your hands to yourself, respecting others, don't eat stuff off the floors and a miriad of social skills that kids just don't seem to have. Kids therefore they go home with homework to learn 2+2 and how to read because there is no time in class. This method gives a distinct advantage to those who have parents with the time to spend on the homework with the kids which seem to be the kids who don't need the emphasis on social skills during the day to begin with. But that is my observations here in Canada, in a less than affluent neighbourhood.
 
Last edited:
LOL, so the parents that obviously have no ability to teach social skills are the ones expected to teach curriculum and the teachers get paid. I love it, I'm in the wrong career path.
 
Ugh, I wouldn't say that. There are some kids in my Sunday School class that have horrible social skills. I get to teach them the Bible AND how to settle down. And I don't get paid in monetary terms. Those three kids are probably my biggest source of stress (short of a trauma, unconscious/unknown, or a working fire at work)

There is a much bigger "payment" that I get from the kids, but that is just knowing that I'm doing what God wants me to do.
 
I was home schooled for many years. And then I went to public school starting 9th grade. First year I go to public school, I'm taught about evolution. Of course, I was no dummy by then and I took everything they taught me with a grain of salt. My mommy taught me well :)
 
When my son was taught about evolution in public school, I must say that I was impressed in the way some of the kids took it as a "platform" to teach others in the class the "real" way the world was created and to share about God. I saw them debating with the teacher on more than one occasion and it was the subject of many conversations I witnessed.
 
I'm both dreading and looking forward to the day my daughter is taught evolution in school. She's only 7, but she's already been exposed to me debating it with other people enough that she's gonna give the teacher a run for their money.

She can be expressive when it comes to her beliefs. :)
 
Stc95 said:
I won't get into the subject to much. Just know that I am definitely for having Creationism taught in school. I find it really funny to see people saying millions of years.. AND that there is so much more evidence.. which, quite to the contrary, there is more evidence for God creating the Earth and all that good stuff.. but like I said, I'm not going to get into this. But I should think that any teacher, or anyone in general should know this


Originally Posted by Dictionary.com
Offend:
1. to irritate, annoy, or anger; cause resentful displeasure in: Even the hint of prejudice offends me.
2. to affect (the sense, taste, etc.) disagreeably.
3. to violate or transgress (a criminal, religious, or moral law).
4. to hurt or cause pain to.
5. (in Biblical use) to cause to fall into sinful ways.
–verb (used without object)
6. to cause resentful displeasure; irritate, annoy, or anger: a remark so thoughtless it can only offend.
7. to err in conduct; commit a sin, crime, or fault.
Click to expand...

Evolution has caused many to doubt their faith and keep people from God. My self included.

Just wanted to throw that out there. And I do believe that if you do support Evo being taught in school you might have some questions to answer. But that is not my call and I certainly do not want to ask nor answer those questions.
Click to expand...

I have wondered before and never put it to text because I could never word it quite right, but I will give it a shot here.

If God is the ruler of the universe, which he is, and he has direct control over all aspects of everything, which he does, then how is evolution such a "non-christian" view? Do you think that God had/has no control over it?

I find evolution to be a completely ingenious act that helps animals, plants, insects etc, defy extinction. It is a beautiful thing and to think that God has nothing to do with it (from what it sounds like from this thread) is an insult, in my opinion. The idea that animals change over time to adapt to their changing environment is completely and utterly fascinating.

I believe in evolution. It has too much proof to ignore it. Does that mean that I believe that we were once apes and monkeys? No. I believe that the Bible is true, and that evolution exists.
 
Last edited:
I don't think people here are talking about evolution from a point of adaptive change, rather the disagreement of evolution as being taught as the source of life as we know it today. The common ancestor theory, for lack of better words.
 
Last edited:
They need to go about it scientifically, since that's what it concerns... science. To go about it scientifically requires lots of evidence. Holy books are the only source of evidence of creationism. Since holy books are very biased, leaning towards the religion they represent, you cannot really use them as scientific proof. Now, what other alternative is there?

I believe it is fine that schools teach evolution. It is the parents job to enforce religious views.
 
Within the CGA, we've circled round-and-round about this. Obviously we don't have the complete answer.

You can't deny that there is evidence of microevolution, that is, that species do adapt over time.

But science has yet to show that macroevolution (ie, common ancestry) has any basis.

Logically, there is just too big of a step to take there for me. Just because the blue finch turned green, taller giraffe can eat higher leaves, and chameleons can color-change to hide in their environment doesn't mean that man comes from fish... which ultimately, is pressed long enough, evolutionists will generally say that all life was created in a cesspool after it rained on the rock we now call earth. Everything came from a single-cell amoeba?

I think the question being posed is this: If we have no solid evidence of Macro-Evolution, why are we unwilling to consider that Intelligent Design (while many will dispute it) is just as valid of a source of our existence?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top