Originally Posted by billwald
You have got to be kidding. Evolution is my perfect example of non-reasoning. If it were so reasonable, why do we have to forcibly indoctrinate children into believing it, and why are evolutionists so terrified of allowing creationists' to even state their cases?
55 comments
The germ theory of disease is my perfect example of non-reasoning. If it were so reasonable, why do we have to forcibly indoctrinate children into believing it, and why are germ-ists so terrified of allowing crystal healers to even state their cases?
"Wah! Evolution! Lies!" is not a case to be stated. Contrary to being scared of it, I'd love for Creationist 'Science' to do some actual, you know, science , but I haven't seen any yet.
As to why children have to be 'indoctrinated' to it, we call that 'education'. You may have heard of it.
"why do we have to forcibly indoctrinate children into believing it"
You mean like the same way we "forcibly indoctrinate" them into believing 2+2=4? Or that the earth revolves around the sun? There's a big difference between indoctrinating and teaching actual verifiable facts. But you and your ilk should know all about forcibly indoctrinating children,don't ya?
"If it were so reasonable, why do we have to forcibly indoctrinate children into believing it..."
And churches do not practice indoctrination? Please. The reason we don't want creationism taught in science classes is because it ISN'T SCIENCE. It's as simple as that
what are you talking about? you have all the time outside of government funded schooling to indoctrinate your kids.
For the record, it was my time outside of class that killed my faith.
Nobody's "terrified" of allowing creationists to state their cases. The US Constitution forbids the government to indoctrinate children in religion. Creationism, whether the Bible's version or the Hindu version or the Iroquois version or the Flying Spaghetti Monster version, is religion with no basis in science.
Because "creationists" cases are easier to explain to children. Its "simpler" to think about creationism than it is to comprehend evolution. However evolution is a phenomenally elegant theory.
AND...
You are trying to explain evolution to small kids. You don't explain in a lot of detail because evolution is a phenomenally hard subject. Its like not explaining quantum physics beyond the basics. Creation is easy to understand and indeed at "school level" creation will piss all over evolution. However when we start bringing in the university level science, evolution shows its robustness.
This is why we have morons like Jiminpa. They have taken a baseball bat to the evolution they were taught in schools despite that being a simplified version of a very sensible theory.
For starters, its not survival of the fittest. Its the survival of life by any means. Be it fitness, cunning and indeed sexiness.
We will teach creationism if people will provide us with a scientific theory of creationism that can be subject to testing. Its not a case of "ah you can't explain this so your entire theory must be wrong and mine must be right". Its a case of "while your theory cannot explain this, I have no theory to speak off".
Let's state the obvious here: scientific theories and explanations, including evolution, do not and will never include an element of magic or supernaturalism. The moment that creeps into a theory or explanation, it ceases to be science.
Now, can you explain ID without any magic or supernaturalism? I thought not. So, it ain't science and don't belong in no science class!
Your creation story should be taught in the public schools beside the creation stories of other belief systems. We already have a class that specifically addresses this topic. It is called mythology.
Fixed
Following your logic, any single branch of science is indoctrination. I tell you what my dad told to a fundy in Tenessee. If you want to be a literalist and believe that the theory of evolution is rubbish, ok, go ahead. But be consequent, you'll have to disbelieve ANY single piece of science, that is, physics, chemistry, etc........and every single law including the law of gravity. And of course, if one is doing that to match Genesis, bear in mind that you'll still have to explain if it's worth the effort explaining who Caine's wife was and why is it possible that snakes speak. Remember, be consequent. You can't be SELECTIVE literalist.
The same way we "indoctrinate" people to believe that 2+2=4 or that "comer" means to eat in Spanish. It's called EDUCATION. You can indoctrinate people into believe a religion or into an ideology, because it's all a human conception, not a proven fact(or are you telling me that somebody has seen God lately?). And don't apply double standards here. Indoctrination has to be either good or bad, not good or bad when it's convenient to you.
They day jiminpa starts regularly allowing Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Satanists, Wiccans, Taoists, Jains, Shintoists, Zoroastrians and Atheists into his church to 'preach the controversy', I'll buy this argument, not before.
You have got to be kidding. Creationism is my perfect example of non-reasoning. If it were so reasonable, why do we have to forcibly indoctrinate children into believing it, and why are creationists so terrified of allowing scientists to even state their cases?
Fixed.
"why are evolutionists so terrified of allowing creationists' to even state their cases?"
What, you mean all those court cases you've lost over the years, regardless of whether you have called it Creationism, Creation Science, or Intelligent Design? Go ahead,, make another "case". lose again, ruin another school board's budget trying to cram ancient myths into modern biology classes.
Do not mistake disgust for fear.
More often than not, we're practically BEGGING you to state your cases! You are the ones trying to force something with no scientific backing into science class. You want Genesis to be taught? Fine, it will be taught. In Bible studies. Deal with it.
I don't know about the rest of you, but here in Britain we have Religious Education, a lesson focused on teaching about religions (of course). Creationism is on the syllabus, in that subject. All children get taught it - as an aspect of religion. And nobody complains.
Why anybody thinks it belongs in Science - among the proven facts - is beyond me.
We're terrified of you because of the Crusades, Inquisition, Witch Trials, and Klu Klux Klan. There, does that about cover it?
Because everyone knows that christian parents never indoctrinate their children into their religion, ever. Without childhood indoctrination, both Christianity and Muslim would be near non-existent by now.
They're allowed to leave the classroom when evolution comes up as a topic. You're not allowed to leave Church. Which is foreceful indoctrination? That's right, evolution.
*Makes the crazy sign at jiminpa.*
why do we have to forcibly indoctrinate children into believing it,
Why do you have to forcibly indoctinate your children into believing your farytale?
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
