Creation vs. Evolution

  • Thread starter ledhed
  • 9,687 comments
  • 433,314 views
ledhed
Its a big deal now for the folks who are upset about the seperation of church and state , to now try to introduce creation into schools by saying that a " benevolent force ' created the universe . What do you think about creation ? Is it a valid enough premise to be taught in school ?

The only class (in public school) the word 'creation' belongs in is art :lol: ..... creation is completely unfounded and unproven; infact, there is more evidance against it than anything..... it MIGHT be a worth-while discussion for psychology students though :rolleyes:

Evolution on the other hand is an extremely plausable scenerio; its borderline fact. Public schools need to teach the facts and only the facts.

................... now wheres my seperation of church and state topic from 2003? 💡 :lol:
 
Red Eye Racer
The only class (in public school) the word 'creation' belongs in is art :lol: ..... creation is completely unfounded and unproven; infact, there is more evidance against it than anything..... it MIGHT be a worth-while discussion for psychology students though :rolleyes:

Evolution on the other hand is an extremely plausable scenerio; its borderline fact. Public schools need to teach the facts and only the facts.

................... now wheres my seperation of church and state topic from 2003? 💡 :lol:

That was an extremely ignorant statement. There is much more towards the creation then there is for the theory of evolution. One being that animals don't come out of the water and then onto land. Doesn't happen. I know frogs and stuff do, but they go BACK to the water when done.

It really makes me wonder why people are so strongly opposed to having a belief in God. If someone could explain it to me I'd really like to know. I've believed in God my entire life. There are things that happen, like LIFE, that can't be explained by science. If they could, we could just raise the dead. But we can't. So, for those of you out there so opposed to the idea of a higher power, I would be most interested in your resoning.
 
Raise the dead eh ? ( Said like homer simpson )

" Boy, get me a set of jumper cables and a wheel barrel, we're going to the grave yard to make a new bowling team "
 
Swift
That was an extremely ignorant statement. There is much more towards the creation then there is for the theory of evolution.

Gee what a wonderful example your setting Moderator Swift.... not only have you made it a point to insult my intelligence; your OPINION was nothing more than a bass-ackwards regurgitation of my own.

👎
 
Red Eye Racer
Gee what a wonderful example your setting Moderator Swift.... not only have you made it a point to insult my intelligence; your OPINION was nothing more than a bass-ackwards regurgitation of my own.

👎

You're not even slightly open to the possibility of there being a God?

Put it this way:

Two of the biggest weaknesses of evolutionary theory are:

1. There is no adequate explanation for the origin of life from dead chemicals. Even the simplest life form is tremendously complex.
The fossil record, our only documentation of whether evolution actually occurred in the past, lacks any transitional forms, and all types appear fully-formed when first present. The evidence that "pre-men" (ape-men) existed is dubious at best.

2. So called pre-man fossils turn out to be those of apes, extinct apes, fully man, or historical frauds.
 
MrktMkr1986
Your not even slightly open to the possibility of there being a God?

Im spiritually agnostic. I'm NOT an athiest. 👍


MrktMkr1986
Put it this way:

Two of the biggest weaknesses of evolutionary theory are:

1. There is no adequate explanation for the origin of life from dead chemicals. Even the simplest life form is tremendously complex.
The fossil record, our only documentation of whether evolution actually occurred in the past, lacks any transitional forms, and all types appear fully-formed when first present. The evidence that "pre-men" (ape-men) existed is dubious at best.

2. So called pre-man fossils turn out to be those of apes, extinct apes, fully man, or historical frauds.

I would be VERY impressed if you could show me evidence that species such as homoerectus and neandertal (mind my spelling please 👎 ) were apes; or further more, frauds.
 
Red Eye Racer
Im spiritually agnostic. I'm NOT an athiest. 👍

OK.

I would be VERY impressed if you could show me evidence that species such as homoerectus and neandertal (mind my spelling please 👎 ) were apes; or further more, frauds.

This may take a while...

I will leave you with this, though:

Evolutionists theorize an early atmosphere without oxygen. They believe that the atmosphere was made up of carbon dioxide, methane, carbon monoxide, ammonia, free hydrogen and water vapor. There is a problem if you consider the ozone layer which protects the earth from ultraviolet rays. Without this layer, organic molecules would be broken down and life would soon be eliminated.
 
MrktMkr1986
I will leave you with this, though:

Evolutionists theorize an early atmosphere without oxygen. They believe that the atmosphere was made up of carbon dioxide, methane, carbon monoxide, ammonia, free hydrogen and water vapor. There is a problem if you consider the ozone layer which protects the earth from ultraviolet rays. Without this layer, organic molecules would be broken down and life would soon be eliminated.

And I'm not at all opposed to the notion that the earth was at one time non-inhabbitable; afterall, at the beginning we were nothing more than a giant ball of hot gases and magma. ;)
 
Red Eye Racer
Gee what a wonderful example your setting Moderator Swift.... not only have you made it a point to insult my intelligence; your OPINION was nothing more than a bass-ackwards regurgitation of my own.

👎

Right, ok sure. No, I didn't insult your intelligence. I said you were ignorant(in that particular statement), that means lack of knowledge. And yep, this is the opinions forum.

So, no answer to my previous question?

Red Eye Racer
Im spiritually agnostic. I'm NOT an athiest. 👍

Interesting. I've always been very intrigued to know how a person could stay in a perpetual state of indecision over such a life altering subject. Oh well.
 
Swift
Right, ok sure. No, I didn't insult your intelligence. I said you were ignorant(in that particular statement), that means lack of knowledge. And yep, this is the opinions forum.

So, no answer to my previous question?

so, saying I have a lack of knowledge is different from insulting me? OK.

no, I dont plan on entertain your remarks any further at this point.

............ and if we really want to get technical, yes, this is the opinions forum, and last time I checked I was protected by the terms of service; even from moderators who think they dont apply (the TOS).
 
Red Eye Racer
so, saying I have a lack of knowledge is different from insulting me? OK.

no, I dont plan on entertain your remarks any further at this point.

............ and if we really want to get technical, yes, this is the opinions forum, and last time I checked I was protected by the terms of service; even from moderators who think they dont apply (the TOS).

I'm still trying to figure out why you're so mad over me saying that your one statement was ignorant. It was, period. But that doesn't mean you dumb or anything like that.

Do what you like. But I didn't violate the terms of service or the AUP because I haven't insulted you. How can you post your opinion, then get upset when someone gives their opinion on your opinion?
 
MrktMkr1986
Two of the biggest weaknesses of evolutionary theory are:

1. There is no adequate explanation for the origin of life from dead chemicals. Even the simplest life form is tremendously complex.

Nope. Sorry.

MrktMkr1986
The fossil record, our only documentation of whether evolution actually occurred in the past, lacks any transitional forms, and all types appear fully-formed when first present. The evidence that "pre-men" (ape-men) existed is dubious at best.

Wholly inaccurate - and of a level I'd expect to see on a Creationist website.

MrktMkr1986
2. So called pre-man fossils turn out to be those of apes, extinct apes, fully man, or historical frauds.

Nope. Again, check out Homo floresiensis.

MrktMkr1986
Evolutionists theorize an early atmosphere without oxygen. They believe that the atmosphere was made up of carbon dioxide, methane, carbon monoxide, ammonia, free hydrogen and water vapor. There is a problem if you consider the ozone layer which protects the earth from ultraviolet rays. Without this layer, organic molecules would be broken down and life would soon be eliminated.

Factually incorrect anyway, but "oxygen-free" doesn't mean "ozone-free". Ozone may be three oxygen molecules nailed to each other, but just you try breathing it.

Swift
There is much more towards the creation then there is for the theory of evolution.

Woooo-ho! That's the largest single porkie EVAR.

There is NO corroborative evidence for a Creationist account.


Swift
One being that animals don't come out of the water and then onto land. Doesn't happen. I know frogs and stuff do, but they go BACK to the water when done.

You do know that "frogs and stuff" are actually land animals and only go to water to mate, don't you?

Besides which, what? You think that "animals don't come out of the water" is in any way a sane statement? THAT'S your basis for evidence pointing to Creation?
 
Well lets just look at then shall we? You said, "That was an extremely ignorant statement". This was with regards to my opinion on a matter of opinion.... therefore, it would be quite tough for me to be "unknowledgeable" about MY opinion..... and when its all said and done, the only thing I have left to assume is that your using the term ignorant to express your displeasure with my remarks; hence, as an insult. The ironic part is that even if you were using in its litteral sence its still an insult.

Now, if I were to say, "I'm quite sure the world is flat".... then you would have justification for telling me I'm extremely ignorant for the simple fact that its a statement severely lacking in knowledge.

With that said, I hope its safe to assume that debate can continue to occur here in regards to matters of opinion without the tastlessness of degrading ones character or thoughts unjustifiably.


on-topic:
its very easy for me to be agnostic and not feel preasured into believing one way or anohter. I believe in karma; thats where it stops until I take my last breath.... from there I'll just enjoy the ride.
 
Red Eye Racer
Now, if I were to say, "I'm quite sure the world is flat".... then you would have justification for telling me I'm extremely ignorant for the simple fact that its a statement severely lacking in knowledge.

From your point of view. From another it could be extremely enlightened. Get my point yet. Relax. I dont' care who blasts my opinions, as long as it doesn't get personal.

Fine, here's the thing. Evolution has no clue where YOU come from. I don't mean your body. I mean you, your personality, your uniqueness that makes you yourself. So, what is the YOU? What is your personality? Can evolutionist theory explain that?

Now, correct me if I'm wrong. But there are 4 acids in our DNA right? Only 4. and they are setup on a double helix system so that no two people in the history of the world are identical. That's a very incredible "accident" if you ask me.

For the theory of evolution to work, we were just proteins hanging out one day and lightning struck or a volcano erupted and life began? Then it took umpteen billion years to evolve to what we are now? Hmm...

Creation might be presented from cold hard fact of the Bible and not have the scientific evidence to back it up. But it at least answers all the questions. There are so many holes and just outright guesses to the creationist theory that it makes me wonder why people fight so hard for it.
 
MrktMkr1986
You're not even slightly open to the possibility of there being a God?

Put it this way:

Two of the biggest weaknesses of evolutionary theory are:

1. There is no adequate explanation for the origin of life from dead chemicals. Even the simplest life form is tremendously complex.
The fossil record, our only documentation of whether evolution actually occurred in the past, lacks any transitional forms, and all types appear fully-formed when first present. The evidence that "pre-men" (ape-men) existed is dubious at best.

2. So called pre-man fossils turn out to be those of apes, extinct apes, fully man, or historical frauds.
I'm sure famine can help with this...but here go's ...
I seem to remember from way back in school learning about the "primordal soup " that life is said to have evolved from..life being a proccess including cell division in a carbon based form , that can reproduce itself. So instead of " poof I wave my wand and humans appear " you have a proccess over millions of years of evolution from single cell organisms to multy cell . from animal and plant life to fish ..amphibian...mammal ..all from the dictates of the enviroment and natural selection .
So on one hand we have the " I wave my wand and stuff happens " theory of creation . Or the " we had a bunch of stuff and things grew from it and changed over millions of years " theory of evolution .
I find it easier to believe the "stuff happened over millions of years" theory , rather than the "wand" one . Things I have seen with my own eyes over the course of my lifetime square with evolutionary theory and at the same time put creationism into the realm of fairy tales .
I have read the Bible and the koran , along with studying other religions in a historical perspective and its my beliefe that" creation " was just a way for the people with all the answers ...( priest - Rabbi etc. ) to explain what was at the time unexplainable.
@ Famine..isnt there an experiment that by combining chemicals and electricity you can create a single cell life form...and no I dont mean Frankenstein stuff :)
 
ledhed
I seem to remember from way back in school learning about the "primordal soup " that life is said to have evolved from..

It's called "ylem" if I remember correctly.

My question is, how was that stuff created? :dopey: What created the "stuff" that created the ylem? How old is the universe? How did it start?
 
Swift
Now, correct me if I'm wrong. But there are 4 acids in our DNA right? Only 4. and they are setup on a double helix system so that no two people in the history of the world are identical. That's a very incredible "accident" if you ask me.

Correction. One acid. Deoxyribonucleic (or Deoxyribosenucleic) Acid. 4 bases - Adenine, Guanine, Cytosine and Thymine. The very nature of a four base system means that there are 64 combinations in a 3 base sequence. It's just mathematics from there onwards.

Speaking of which, there are 100 billion stars in our galaxy, and millions of other observable galaxies. And yet God said "Let there be light" on ours (2 days before he made the Sun to shine the light on it) and no other. That's a very incredible "accident" too.

And of course several people in the history of the world have been identical. Or "identical twins" (triplets, quadruplets and so on) as they're known.


Swift
For the theory of evolution to work, we were just proteins hanging out one day and lightning struck or a volcano erupted and life began? Then it took umpteen billion years to evolve to what we are now? Hmm...

No. Primordial Soup is not part of Evolutionary Theory. Evolutionary Theory covers the observable change in species throughout generations to further species more suited to their environment. What species is Primordial Soup?

Swift
Creation might be presented from cold hard fact of the Bible and not have the scientific evidence to back it up. But it at least answers all the questions.

What!?

I thought the outright lie you came out with earlier was a doozie, but this one takes the cake!

"cold hard fact of the Bible"? "it at least answers all the questions"? Are you mad?

Where did we come from? Aliens put us here. Right, that answers all the questions. Must be true. Oh, but hang on... Where did the aliens come from?

Substitute "aliens" for "God". Creationism throws up FAR more questions than it "answers". And, lest we forget, Occam's Razor.


Swift
There are so many holes and just outright guesses to the creationist theory that it makes me wonder why people fight so hard for it.

I'm assuming you meant "Evolutionary" here, but you've just nailed the point without realising it.

Creation is presented as fact. Nothing will EVER change the opinion of Creationists. They KNOW it happened and that's that. Evolution is presented as a theory. Everything changes the opinion of the Evolutionary biologists. They think they know how it happened, but every new piece of information is assimilated and the theory adjusted/cemented as appropriate.

Why would we want to "fight so hard" for the pursuit of knowledge? Good question. Let's lay down all our technology that we've fought so hard for and go back to living in caves and wondering where babies come from...


MrktMkr1986
My question is, how was that stuff created? What created the "stuff" that created the ylem? How old is the universe? How did it start?

In reverse order(ish).

The known universe came into existence as a result of a 11th dimensional brane interaction, creating what we would identify in 4-dimensional space-time as a "singularity event". This occurred roughly 18.5 billion years ago, by current estimates and 4D space-time has been expanding at the rate of c ever since.

The Primordial Soup was formed from chemicals abundant in the Earth's atmosphere at the time - 3.5 billion years ago after the collision which caused the Moon's formation and melted the surface of the Earth. Carbon compounds (specifically methane and carbon dioxide - and one has to wonder why we'd need an ozone layer with a 4 mile thick carbon dioxside cloud), heat, water and a lot of electrostatic discharge. Certain simple compounds can be formed in these conditions, and given the size of the molecules compared to the size of the planet the probability of these compounds forming is 1, and assimilate the raw materials around them to manufacture more of themselves. I won't go into the extremely dull biochemistry behind it, but they can create amino acids, which create proteins, which create more amino acids and proteins, which can eventually create nucleic-acid-like compounds, which can create more amino acids and proteins until we see almost an evolution of chemicals to form entirely self-replicating compounds like RNA and DNA.

According to current theory.
 
Famine
There cannot be a scientific proof of the Jewish/Christian/Islamic God/Allah - their God is directly described as omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent. To prove their existence instantly belies all three of those things, thus disproving their existence.
Hey Famine. How you doing? Just curious. Why would this disprove their exsistence?

Famine
Creation vs. Evolution is interesting. Creation is taught as fact. Evolution is taught as theory. The theory of Evolution itself evolves as new evidence is incorporated. "Creation Theory" does not. "Creation Science" is an oxymoron.

And if you want to piss Creationists off, mention the Raelians.
Don't mention it then.
 
Famine
The known universe came into existence as a result of a 11th dimensional brane interaction, creating what we would identify in 4-dimensional space-time as a "singularity event". This occurred roughly 18.5 billion years ago, by current estimates and 4D space-time has been expanding at the rate of c ever since.

The Primordial Soup was formed from chemicals abundant in the Earth's atmosphere at the time - 3.5 billion years ago after the collision which caused the Moon's formation and melted the surface of the Earth. Carbon compounds (specifically methane and carbon dioxide - and one has to wonder why we'd need an ozone layer with a 4 mile thick carbon dioxside cloud), heat, water and a lot of electrostatic discharge. Certain simple compounds can be formed in these conditions, and given the size of the molecules compared to the size of the planet the probability of these compounds forming is 1, and assimilate the raw materials around them to manufacture more of themselves. I won't go into the extremely dull biochemistry behind it, but they can create amino acids, which create proteins, which create more amino acids and proteins, which can eventually create nucleic-acid-like compounds, which can create more amino acids and proteins until we see almost an evolution of chemicals to form entirely self-replicating compounds like RNA and DNA.

According to current theory.[/color][/b]

Thank you for that insightful, informative answer. :)

Question, though:

Wouldn't the presence of oxygen react with the amino acids and sugar to produce water and carbon dioxide via oxidation?

*edit* You say "current" theory... does that mean that this theory is subject to change as well?
 
Famine
Correction. One acid. Deoxyribonucleic (or Deoxyribosenucleic) Acid. 4 bases - Adenine, Guanine, Cytosine and Thymine. The very nature of a four base system means that there are 64 combinations in a 3 base sequence. It's just mathematics from there onwards.

Speaking of which, there are 100 billion stars in our galaxy, and millions of other observable galaxies. And yet God said "Let there be light" on ours (2 days before he made the Sun to shine the light on it) and no other. That's a very incredible "accident" too.

And of course several people in the history of the world have been identical. Or "identical twins" (triplets, quadruplets and so on) as they're known.

Ok, I know you're not dumb. But that's not what I meant. Are they identical in personalities? Nope, sure they look the same. But they don't act the same or probably like all the same foods.

No. Primordial Soup is not part of Evolutionary Theory. Evolutionary Theory covers the observable change in species throughout generations to further species more suited to their environment. What species is Primordial Soup?

Ok then how did it all start?

What!?

I thought the outright lie you came out with earlier was a doozie, but this one takes the cake!

"cold hard fact of the Bible"? "it at least answers all the questions"? Are you mad?

Where did we come from? Aliens put us here. Right, that answers all the questions. Must be true. Oh, but hang on... Where did the aliens come from?

Substitute "aliens" for "God". Creationism throws up FAR more questions than it "answers". And, lest we forget, Occam's Razor.

Now see, this is where things get personal. You totally contradicted yourself. I understand that you were being sarcastic in your aliens comment. But that could be true to someone from their point of view. Who are we to tell them they are lying?

I'm assuming you meant "Evolutionary" here, but you've just nailed the point without realising it.

Creation is presented as fact. Nothing will EVER change the opinion of Creationists. They KNOW it happened and that's that. Evolution is presented as a theory. Everything changes the opinion of the Evolutionary biologists. They think they know how it happened, but every new piece of information is assimilated and the theory adjusted/cemented as appropriate.

Why would we want to "fight so hard" for the pursuit of knowledge? Good question. Let's lay down all our technology that we've fought so hard for and go back to living in caves and wondering where babies come from...
Yeah, I'm a web designer and car enthusiast and I want to dump all technology. Where did you get that one from.

Right, evolution is a theory that gets changed on a daily basis. There could be some "discovery" tommorow that complete proves the theory to be innaccurate. Then what? just take it as a new discovery?

In reverse order(ish).
The Primordial Soup was formed from chemicals abundant in the Earth's atmosphere at the time - 3.5 billion years ago after the collision which caused the Moon's formation and melted the surface of the Earth. Carbon compounds (specifically methane and carbon dioxide - and one has to wonder why we'd need an ozone layer with a 4 mile thick carbon dioxside cloud), heat, water and a lot of electrostatic discharge. Certain simple compounds can be formed in these conditions, and given the size of the molecules compared to the size of the planet the probability of these compounds forming is 1, and assimilate the raw materials around them to manufacture more of themselves. I won't go into the extremely dull biochemistry behind it, but they can create amino acids, which create proteins, which create more amino acids and proteins, which can eventually create nucleic-acid-like compounds, which can create more amino acids and proteins until we see almost an evolution of chemicals to form entirely self-replicating compounds like RNA and DNA.

According to current theory.

And we get life from protiens coming together? Nobody answered my question yet though. Where do YOU come from?
 
it takes more faith to believe we came from some cosmic gasses coming together then BOOM! (for no apparent reason) the universe, for no reason

then to believe an all powerful God could create everything in 6 literal days

i wish i could have faith like that
 
XVII
it takes more faith to believe we came from some cosmic gasses coming together then BOOM! (for no apparent reason) the universe, for no reason

then to believe an all powerful God could create everything in 6 literal days

i wish i could have faith like that

I agree. Especially considering the fact that the theory of Evolution is constantly changing.
 
people shudder when i tell them i believe the earth is 6000 years old and that God created the earth in 6 LITERAL days...
 
XVII
people shudder when i tell them i believe the earth is 6000 years old and that God created the earth in 6 LITERAL days...

It's difficult for people to think outside themselves. They also generally don't want to feel responsible for anyone but themselves.
 
XVII
people shudder when i tell them i believe the earth is 6000 years old and that God created the earth in 6 LITERAL days...

How could that be so when the Egyptians ruled 4000 years ago, and cavemen ruled 100,000 years ago? It's just not possible. And howcome (assuming the dinosaurs lasted more than 2000 years) the Egyptians never depicted the dinosaurs in any drawings?

I agree. Especially considering the fact that the theory of Evolution is constantly changing.

All theories are constantly changing, how does that take faith? Would it take any less if it just stood there without analyzing anything and just kept saying "No, it's right. No, it's right. No, it's right."?
it takes more faith to believe we came from some cosmic gasses coming together then BOOM! (for no apparent reason) the universe, for no reason

then to believe an all powerful God could create everything in 6 literal days

i wish i could have faith like that

You mean to say, you believe more in the idea that one all powerful being just *poof* created everything in 6 days, with absolutely no proof whatsoever, with no regard for review or critical analysis, than it is to believe a constantly analyzed, peer-reviewed, ever-changing-so-it-all fits theory with actual models and tests?

Ok then how did it all start?

He's covered that before, many a time, and I'm sure he probably wouldn't want to do it again.
It's difficult for people to think outside themselves. They also generally don't want to feel responsible for anyone but themselves.

From your personal experience, perhaps. How does that mean we're more or less likely to believe one theory over the other? How does that answer why more people believe science? Oh, wait, because it's rational.
 
PS
How could that be so when the Egyptians ruled 4000 years ago, and cavemen ruled 100,000 years ago? It's just not possible. And howcome (assuming the dinosaurs lasted more than 2000 years) the Egyptians never depicted the dinosaurs in any drawings?

Greg, it depends on whose calender you're using.


You mean to say, you believe more in the idea that one all powerful being just *poof* created everything in 6 days, with absolutely no proof whatsoever, with no regard for review or critical analysis, than it is to believe a constantly analyzed, peer-reviewed, ever-changing-so-it-all fits theory with actual models and tests?

Apparently.

Or could it be ever-changing because they have no idea what they're talking about?
 
once again, everything in the garden of eden was very good so there was no bloodshed

noahs ark (see attached pic, measurements mentioned in genesis as cubits)

and if you read the 6 day account just for what it says, 6 literal days...why not question the meaning of the word day in other accounts of the old testament? (was jonah in the whale for 3000 years?)

plus i dont think many dinosaurs could live in a desert where egypt is mostly
 
XVII
once again, everything in the garden of eden was very good so there was no bloodshed

noahs ark (see attached pic, measurements mentioned in genesis as cubits)

and if you read the 6 day account just for what it says, 6 literal days...why not question the meaning of the word day in other accounts of the old testament? (was jonah in the whale for 3000 years?)

Jonah was never in a whale. The baleen would have filtered him out, or he would have been dissolved in powerful stomache acids.
Greg, it depends on whose calender you're using.
Gregorian. What were they using?

Apparently.

Or could it be ever-changing because they have no idea what they're talking about?

Or the fact they could re-create it in a smaller scale if they had to.

[edit]

How does someone feed all those animals and people, Nate? Where's the chef's kitchen?
 
easily God could have preserved Jonah in a whale

what about joshua marching around the walls of jericho 7000 years?
 
Swift
Fine, here's the thing. Evolution has no clue where YOU come from. I don't mean your body. I mean you, your personality, your uniqueness that makes you yourself. So, what is the YOU? What is your personality? Can evolutionist theory explain that?

Creation might be presented from cold hard fact of the Bible and not have the scientific evidence to back it up. But it at least answers all the questions. There are so many holes and just outright guesses to the creationist theory that it makes me wonder why people fight so hard for it.

I see now that you simply need closure; thats totally fine infact a vast majority of the human race seems to need it. I guess it goes to show that peopel can be taught to believe anything...... but the last thing I wanna see is that crap being shoved in my kids face by someone who is supposed to be an authority figure (the teachers in the schools in the topic we're slowing getting off-track on).

Personally, I'd prefer they didnt teach EITHER of them in public school...... as long as 90%+ of the planet is living in a fairytale world I'll take my chances taking my kid to the library and teaching him/her myself rather than know that they are being taught a 4000 year old bedtime story with an emphisis on basic morals..... oh yeah, and the fairytale ending where everyone (well, a few at least ;) ) gets to live happily ever after.

If there's a god then there's a plan; but I aint about to bet the farm on it and sacrifice my souls free will for 80+ years "just in case";... and it all leads back to teaching creation/evolution in school...... religion is like nicotien, hook 'em while their young and you'll have 'em for life, who cares if its not fact, it teaches (rather, DEMANDS) good morals right? :rolleyes:
 

Latest Posts

Back