Page 15 of 30 FirstFirst ... 5131415161725 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 300

Thread: O'Donnell Questions Separation of Church, State in Senate Debate

  1. #141
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,470

    Re: O'Donnell Questions Separation of Church, State in Senate Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by liblady View Post
    personally, i don't care what anybody believes about our origins. but we should stick to what we know as far as school goes. we can teach our kids whatever else we want them to know outside of school........
    I agree with you...

    But to say this women is just supporting local rights is insane.. She has a personal bias and a misunderstanding about science. Why should ID be taught in a science class? It shouldn't, because it's not a science..

    It's all a political issue. Kids should just be taught science. If they think children need to learn about religion, then they need to be honest about the debate.. and stop trying to argue that local SD's should have the right to deprave a science classroom of scientific study and teach religious theory..

  2. #142
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,470

    Re: O'Donnell Questions Separation of Church, State in Senate Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Ajay View Post
    If homeschooling teaches Creationism and/or Intelligent Design as equal scientific theories to evolution, then we are in trouble. Many who homeschool may do a good job, but there are whole sects of people out there with issues that go beyond whether or not a public school in their are is failing. Ideological and religious tenets are a poor metric for education.
    You can't even teach they are on the same level, if you are honest and sincerely understand the scientific method.. which is the scary part. If you have a teacher ignoring or ignorant about the scientific method, then that teacher is undermining the foundation of science.

    We need to be concerned that children are learning the foundations of science more than anything else..

    If ID deserves any mention it's in an advanced science classroom, and it should be a small side note.. in one of those discussion boxes in a text. But it shouldn't be taught outright.
    Last edited by SheWolf; 10-20-10 at 04:28 PM.

  3. #143
    pirate lover
    liblady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    St Thomas, VI
    Last Seen
    03-14-16 @ 03:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    16,165
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: O'Donnell Questions Separation of Church, State in Senate Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Ajay View Post
    you misunderstand:
    Quote Originally Posted by liblady:
    creation and intelligent design have no place in public schools, period. and i'm a christian.


    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree:

    They don't? When instructing about world religions, it would be improper to have creation stories?

    I'm sure you meant in the science classroom, but just wanting to make sure.
    ------------------

    Quote Originally Posted by liblady:
    thanks for the clarification, yes, of course that's what i meant.
    ---------------------

    there is where I said you'd been snookered. Why?

    because when Fiddy wrote:
    "They don't? When instructing about world religions, it would be improper to have creation stories?"
    Fiddy was wrong.

    As I wrote:
    That's just it. Creationism and Intelligent Design are not religions. They are purported to be (by their proponents) to be science. They would not be in any comparative religion course or in any other course about religion.
    creationism is a religious tenet that cannot exist without religion. i believe id is the same. they are not science, no matter who claims them to be. so, they could be taught within a class on religion, legitimately.

    Originally Posted by johnny_rebson:

    These are the same liberals who forgot how Iraq attacked us on 9/11.


  4. #144
    Student
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Last Seen
    03-20-13 @ 04:18 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    254

    Re: O'Donnell Questions Separation of Church, State in Senate Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by liblady View Post
    creationism is a religious tenet that cannot exist without religion. i believe id is the same. they are not science, no matter who claims them to be. so, they could be taught within a class on religion, legitimately.
    tenet: [ a religious doctrine that is proclaimed as true without proof ]

    The themes and stories in them could be taught as religion, but you are stretching the argument. ID and Creationism in the schools have never been offered up as religion. They have always been offered up as scientific theory.

    As I tried to say before, maybe you are confusing differing ideas that use the same term: creationism.

    Creationism with a capital 'C' is not a religious tenet.

  5. #145
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: O'Donnell Questions Separation of Church, State in Senate Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by SheWolf View Post
    Weather of not the concept is in the constitution is a philosophical debate.. It depends on what you subjectively believe "separation of church and state" actually means and what they constitution says..
    It's not philisophical at all. The words are very clearly used and chosen. The establishiment clause as it's called is a prevention of the State from "establishing" a religion. It does not use language that identifies a separation of church and state. Anywhere. At all. The Constituion is not subjective - what IS subjective are the Supreme Court rulings and subjective philisophical adjudications that create a separation of church and state based on what I believe is a misinterpretation of the 1st Amendment that has now stood for 60+ years.

    I'd suggest reading of Rehnquists view in Jaffree as a good basis ...

    (edit - here's the link)
    http://candst.tripod.com/rebuttal.htm


    The bottom line is yes, the founders did not want a national religion. They had that in England with King George and escaped it. But that does not mean that religion and public policy must at all times be separate. Yet O'Donnell is portrayed as an idiot - when she was correct. Establishment of religion and a separation of church and state are two different things...
    I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on whats being proposed here, hed agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute. - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  6. #146
    Professor
    Phoenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    04-27-17 @ 10:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,782

    Re: O'Donnell Questions Separation of Church, State in Senate Debate

    I think that 2 candidates for US Senate discussing the origins of the universe in their debate is ridiculous. Especially in this point in time. The value of the dollar is in the ****can, the economy is a mess and showing very little sign of recovery. That is what they should be discussing. What they believe should be taught in school won't matter when the school is closed due to lack of funds.
    From the ashes.

  7. #147
    Student
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Last Seen
    03-20-13 @ 04:18 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    254

    Re: O'Donnell Questions Separation of Church, State in Senate Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post
    I think that 2 candidates for US Senate discussing the origins of the universe in their debate is ridiculous. Especially in this point in time. The value of the dollar is in the ****can, the economy is a mess and showing very little sign of recovery. That is what they should be discussing. What they believe should be taught in school won't matter when the school is closed due to lack of funds.
    SO let me get this straight. You're one of those angy people who think if the 2 Senate candidates dicsussed the dollar, the economy, and signs of a recovery, we would be better off?

    How? What would that have solved?

  8. #148
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:36 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: O'Donnell Questions Separation of Church, State in Senate Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by SheWolf View Post
    Her personal support of ID is very clear.
    Don't know, don't care.

    Quote Originally Posted by SheWolf View Post
    Her misunderstanding that evolution isn't fact, is also very clear
    "Evolution" when it refers to the body material taught in schools, is not "a fact."

    You may wish to define evolution as narrowly as needed to make your claim, but all you're doing is obfuscating.

  9. #149
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:36 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: O'Donnell Questions Separation of Church, State in Senate Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Ajay View Post
    A phantom opponent in a bogus argument? Who if anyone, ever said anyone but local government gets to decide what is taught? Does a Federal Dept of Education set curriculum?
    Now you're catching on. O'Donnells views on Evolution are irrelevant. Wouldn't it be nice if they would discuss matters of substance in debates rather than asking about crap like this?

  10. #150
    Student
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Last Seen
    03-20-13 @ 04:18 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    254

    Re: O'Donnell Questions Separation of Church, State in Senate Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    Now you're catching on. O'Donnells views on Evolution are irrelevant. Wouldn't it be nice if they would discuss matters of substance in debates rather than asking about crap like this?
    Substance? When one candidate is obviously a fool? Sorry, but not liking the current system and being angry is no excuse for dumbing down the expectations of qualifications for a US Senate candidacy. COD's views are relevant in that they expose her for being the imbecile she is.

Page 15 of 30 FirstFirst ... 5131415161725 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •