• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

You Have No Constitutional Right To Your Own Science

Does An American Have Freedom Of Science?

  • I think my religion explains the world and I have no use for science

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    23
NO.

In any public school, all Americans have contributed tax dollars and no child should be taught nonsense.

Again, despite your protestations to the contrary, that nonsense is in the eye of the beholder, and schools are NOT federal in this country.

It is not in our nation's best interests to allow parents to render their children ignorant and unemployable.[/COLOR]

Once again, not a federal decision. And if that last were true there would be no humanities taught in public school, nor any of a number of other currently required subjects.
 
That's fine. Just realize that I probably wouldn't hire most of the kids ages 18-25 that I see to dig a ditch for me, regardless of whether they got their education at a public or private school.
That's quite alright by me.I have a knack for seeing the hidden talent in people and giving them a chance when others such as yourself won't.I volunteer at a program that teaches culinary skills to at risk teens."Carlos" had a knack for cooking,and when he became 18,I gave him a job at one of my restaurants as a dishwasher.Eight years later,he's my assistant chef at my latest restaurant,and a fine cook.He has a home,a wife and 2 lovely twins now.I took a chance on him,and we both benefitted from it.
Then again, there are those of us who would never work for someone like your daughter anyway. Not because of her educational background, but because of her gender.

Again that is quite alright by me.There are plenty of other people out there who are just as qualified or better who don't have that problem working for my daughter because of her gender.
As both a parent and a businessman,there is nothing I like better than people who are willing to limit their own options in life because of some ideology.That just means more opportunities for success and wealth for me,my children,my grandchildren,my great-grandchildren.....so you just go on right ahead doing with what you are doing and believing whatever it is you want to believe.You are just doing me and my family a HUGE FAVOR by not willing or able to compete.
 
As both a parent and a businessman,there is nothing I like better than people who are willing to limit their own options in life because of some ideology.That just means more opportunities for success and wealth for me,my children,my grandchildren,my great-grandchildren.....so you just go on right ahead doing with what you are doing and believing whatever it is you want to believe.You are just doing me and my family a HUGE FAVOR by not willing or able to compete.

We'll see how that works out for the lot of you on the OTHER side of Eternity.
 
Excellent summation. I'd like to add a couple points though. One of the reasons I see folks reject many scientific conclusions is down to reproducability. So many scientific conclusions are not reproducible by lay people (they do not have the tools, equipment or learning to do so). Also, again, many times, the scientific conclusion is at direct odds with the individual's life experience.

However, you leave out a very important factor, which Goshin mentioned - scientists are human just like everyone else. They fudge numbers, seek advancement in their fields (sometimes to the exclusion of accuracy), cheat, deceive and downright just get it wrong. The tools of scientific inquiry are sound, the problem is the nut behind the wheel.

Not wanting to start anything but I did cover your last point. Reproducability. The Scientific method REQUIRES that any experiment or theory be subject to and be able to be reproduced. This is where the quacks get caught. They data is so off or bogus that no one else can reproduce what they did by using thier data and/or information. A classic example of this is back about 15 years ago some "scientists" claimed to have solved cold fusion. Even Clinton got on the band wagon, but when other labs tried to reproduce what they did based on thier data it was found to be a hoax. This is the part of science that the lay person doesn't realize. And it is not just one time reproducability its over and over and over again.

My particular flavor of animal behavior (ethology) is Tinbergian as opposed to Lorenzian. Nicos Tinbergen was an ethologist during the early part of the last century who worked in Germany, Sweden and England. He developed a strict set of guidelines for observation which reguired the ethologist to observe without comment until he could not only repeatedly observe the same behavior over and over and over again, but confirm these repeated observations through research of available literature. This is the essence of good science.

The cracker jack scientist will take short cuts, tweek data (as you said) and in the worst case have an agenda before he/she even starts. If you can't repeat what another scientist did over and over again with the same result it is NOT science, its smoke and mirrors. Fortunately these nut jobs are in the extreme minority the problem is they seem to get all the press and that hurts real science and always has.
 
Don't impose your beliefs on my children, and I won't impose my beliefs on yours.

But surely some things must simply be truths. Is it a belief that gravity attracts mass to other mass? Is it a belief that UV radiation causes skin cancer? Is it a belief that this planet is more than half composed of salt water? Is it a belief that F=MA? Is it a belief that stars are billions of miles away, and not pinpricks in a blanket over the Earth?

The trouble with this kind of notion is that some beliefs straight up contradict truth. Young Earth Creationists believe things that are demonstrably wrong. Christian Scientists who think that medicine is unnecessary are wrong. How much harm are people who hold wrong beliefs allowed to do?

Now mind you, we can punish each person who harms according to a wrong belief, but then there will always be more, and then more harm. It will never end until the wrong beliefs go away. Beliefs that women who didn't conform to expected standards had made a pact with the devil and ought to be killed... they went away. Beliefs that twins were evil and should be killed... they went away. Beliefs that deformed children should be cast away to die... they went away, too.

Beliefs are dangerous. Things you know, that you can prove, those can be debated and discussed. They can be analyzed. You can figure out if they're good or bad. Beliefs are just "I believe xyz, and there's nothing you can say to change that." Unchangeable positions that aren't subject to examination are dangerous.

That's why belief is bad. Knowledge is good. Belief is bad.
 
That's why belief is bad. Knowledge is good. Belief is bad.

So you would suggest that my Living Will and Do not Resuscitate Order should be voided by the State simply because they do not allow for the treatment of certain diseases that have the chance of being survived, or lived with?
 
"How to improve public schools" is a vastly different convo from "no taxpayer dollars should be spent on educating children", Pirate.

The problem with public schools is the argument now exploding in your thread. Education is very personal. No two people will educate their children the excact same way with same emphasis on certain subjects. Public schools came about because people back in the late 1800's thought that the europeans specifically the prussians had a good idea. Well America is NOT europe. We are a different breed of nuts. We are diverse and getting more so as time passes on. Our schools MUST be able to cope with that. One size fits all doesnt work. While I dont agree with public schooling as a general policy sometimes that is a good policy loacaly. State wide or national, is just foolish as we are seeing now, hell your schools were you are are having trouble teaching people to read. Think about all the money and resources you are wasting there with little to show for it. Public schools are not working for your communitie. You need to figure something else out. Radical problems require radical solutions. Everybody is thinking inside the box, to use an overworked cliche. Time to start thinking radicaly, to think about the unthinkable.
 
That's quite alright by me.I have a knack for seeing the hidden talent in people and giving them a chance when others such as yourself won't.I volunteer at a program that teaches culinary skills to at risk teens."Carlos" had a knack for cooking,and when he became 18,I gave him a job at one of my restaurants as a dishwasher.Eight years later,he's my assistant chef at my latest restaurant,and a fine cook.He has a home,a wife and 2 lovely twins now.I took a chance on him,and we both benefitted from it.


Again that is quite alright by me.There are plenty of other people out there who are just as qualified or better who don't have that problem working for my daughter because of her gender.
As both a parent and a businessman,there is nothing I like better than people who are willing to limit their own options in life because of some ideology.That just means more opportunities for success and wealth for me,my children,my grandchildren,my great-grandchildren.....so you just go on right ahead doing with what you are doing and believing whatever it is you want to believe.You are just doing me and my family a HUGE FAVOR by not willing or able to compete.

I like your style brother. More business men need to think like you. The art of being successfull is learning how to recognize opportunity and then take advantage. Amen and keep preaching.:)
 
Beliefs are dangerous. Things you know, that you can prove, those can be debated and discussed. They can be analyzed. You can figure out if they're good or bad. Beliefs are just "I believe xyz, and there's nothing you can say to change that." Unchangeable positions that aren't subject to examination are dangerous.

That's why belief is bad. Knowledge is good. Belief is bad.
Your comment was good until it delved into this gross simplification of the issue.

"Belief good. Knowledge bad." is not a good argument if only for the fact that scientists often have to believe before they create or use the tools required to acquire knowledge.
 
The problem with public schools is the argument now exploding in your thread. Education is very personal. No two people will educate their children the excact same way with same emphasis on certain subjects. Public schools came about because people back in the late 1800's thought that the europeans specifically the prussians had a good idea. Well America is NOT europe. We are a different breed of nuts. We are diverse and getting more so as time passes on. Our schools MUST be able to cope with that. One size fits all doesnt work. While I dont agree with public schooling as a general policy sometimes that is a good policy loacaly. State wide or national, is just foolish as we are seeing now, hell your schools were you are are having trouble teaching people to read. Think about all the money and resources you are wasting there with little to show for it. Public schools are not working for your communitie. You need to figure something else out. Radical problems require radical solutions. Everybody is thinking inside the box, to use an overworked cliche. Time to start thinking radicaly, to think about the unthinkable.

I'd have no problem with localizing textbook purchases, but I do think we need national standards on their contents.

There's an efficiency of scale lost when you don't buy in bulk, but if people want to pay more, I have no heartburn over it.
 
Logical flaw is illogical, Tigger.

FAITH rather than Logic is the basis of the comment; so the illogic of it is immaterial, Pinky. Some of us choose to experience the world with a different set of senses from the ones you prefer. That's fine. I have no problem with you choosing to limit the senses you use to experience to world, just please don't tell me that I have to as well.
 
I'd have no problem with localizing textbook purchases, but I do think we need national standards on their contents.

There's an efficiency of scale lost when you don't buy in bulk, but if people want to pay more, I have no heartburn over it.

We dont need national standards, thats what got us into this mess in the first place. Everybody is argueing about what should go into them and be left out. The market can sort that out. Schools should be funded and controlled locally. I mean real localy. Each school should be its own entity supported by its users. That way the people who use have the most say in what goes on in it.
 
FAITH rather than Logic is the basis of the comment; so the illogic of it is immaterial, Pinky. Some of us choose to experience the world with a different set of senses from the ones you prefer. That's fine. I have no problem with you choosing to limit the senses you use to experience to world, just please don't tell me that I have to as well.

The logical flaw is that if eternity is eternal, it cannot have an "other side".

As for faith, I have it myself, Tigger. Mine is different than yours. Do I have any right to force you to pay for mine through taxation, etc.?

 
We dont need national standards, thats what got us into this mess in the first place. Everybody is argueing about what should go into them and be left out. The market can sort that out. Schools should be funded and controlled locally. I mean real localy. Each school should be its own entity supported by its users. That way the people who use have the most say in what goes on in it.

We sure as hell do need national standards if some school boards would bless religion replacing science in their schools -- and you know damned well, many would.
 
Your comment was good until it delved into this gross simplification of the issue.

"Belief good. Knowledge bad." is not a good argument if only for the fact that scientists often have to believe before they create or use the tools required to acquire knowledge.

No, they don't. Scientists hypothesize or speculate.

However, belief is not bad -- what's bad is when you use mistakenly rely on religion or faith or belief at a decision point that is science-driven.
 
1. Discipline yes. Beat abusively no.

2. Those who want their children to be educated in a certain manner differing substantially from societal norms should put their children in private schools. This would include rabid atheists who don't want their children exposed to Christmas as much as fundamentalists who don't want their children exposed to evolution. Vouchers.

3. Denounce? As is "speak against"? Sure, anyone can say anything. Denounce as in "try to block it"? Well, the bugger's got to stand to election doesn't he? Hold him accountable at the polls.

How are we as a society to define "discipline" and "abuse"? What one group sees as natural discipline, another bunch of folks will call child abuse. How do we accommodate the two factions?

"rabid atheists" generally don't care about their children being "exposed to Christmas". They do care about their children being coerced into participation in religious ceremonies in public schools.

What if a majority of a politician's constituency supports his denouncement of scientific knowledge? Does the majority get to change the definition of science simply because they really and truly believe nonsense to be real?
 
The logical flaw is that if eternity is eternal, it cannot have an "other side".

I don't want to get into a massive spiritual/religious debate on this. I could have said "The other side of the Veil" or something like that, if you'd have prefered.

As for faith, I have it myself, Tigger. Mine is different than yours. Do I have any right to force you to pay for mine through taxation, etc.?

I'm not asking anyone to pay for my faith. Hell, I don't even belong to an organized religious group, so I can't even say some clergyman who represents me is getting government support through tax exemptions or anything. I don't believe in teaching Creationism, my views on how the world came to be, or anything of the sort in public schools either. All I would like to see is the scientific community admit that they don't have an answer for everything and that they still DON'T KNOW quite a bit about almost everything. Until they are willing to do that, and to accept that not everyone is going to bow down before the altar of Science; I will not send any child of mine to a public school. I'm not asking you (or anyone else) to support my viewpoint financially. I'm just asking you not to stick your nose into what I would teach my own children, on my own time, in my own home.
 
This has nothing to do with "moddycoddling the fundies." It has to do with the knowledge people must have in order to be effective students and citizens as well as critical thinkers. A nation as ignorant as it is about religion now is self-defeating. People's ignorance about Islam has caused them to support foreign policy that might decrease our national security. People's ignorance about Christianity has much of the population supporting laws based on that religion that many would not if they actually knew anything about the Bible and religion they claim allegiance to.

Religion classes might, in some sense, seem needless, but considering that beliefs about religion significantly impact much of the countries social, political and personal views, such classes are actually quite important.

I agree for the most part that children should study religions other than the one they follow at home. I would insert the word "comparative" into the title of the Religious Studies class name.

The problem comes when one actually gets into the fundamentals of the class and the curriculum - we have far too many in this country who would seize the opportunity offered by a "Comparative Religious Studies" class to proselytize for their specific beliefs while denigrating all others. We already have admitted creationists teaching their biblical beliefs in biology classes, I'm afraid the same would happen in any classroom looking at world religions.
 
We'll see how that works out for the lot of you on the OTHER side of Eternity.

You mad Tigger?
That just sounds so petty,bitter and jealous on your part.
One would think you are wishing harm and punishment on me and my family just because I took whatever opportunities that came my way,ran with it,and reaped the rewards and benefits because of it,and you didn't.

Neither of us really KNOWS what's in store for either of us on the OTHERSIDE.
But until that time comes,I'm going to continue to jump on any opportunity to make my businesses even greater successes.
But until that time comes,I am going to take every opportunity that comes my way to give me,my wife,my progeny and my descendents every advantage to make our lives better.
But until that time comes,I am going to do my best to overcome any obstacle that comes my,my wife,my progeny and my descendents way.

But until that time comes,I am going to enjoy the fruits of my labors.
But until that time comes,I am going to enjoy the love of my beautiful wife,my daughters,and my grandchildren.

Because I know that even if my business tank tomorrow,if my big fat bank account were to suddenly go "poof",if my big house and fancy car are taken away,I'll still be a very wealthy man because I know my wife,children and my grandchildren will still love and respect me.

Both me and Lena both started out with nothing,and in the end,we'll leave with nothing.
But in the meantime we Verthaines are a strong and hardy bunch ,and we'll survive one way or another,as we always have.
As a family.
 
I don't want to get into a massive spiritual/religious debate on this. I could have said "The other side of the Veil" or something like that, if you'd have prefered.



I'm not asking anyone to pay for my faith. Hell, I don't even belong to an organized religious group, so I can't even say some clergyman who represents me is getting government support through tax exemptions or anything. I don't believe in teaching Creationism, my views on how the world came to be, or anything of the sort in public schools either. All I would like to see is the scientific community admit that they don't have an answer for everything and that they still DON'T KNOW quite a bit about almost everything. Until they are willing to do that, and to accept that not everyone is going to bow down before the altar of Science; I will not send any child of mine to a public school. I'm not asking you (or anyone else) to support my viewpoint financially. I'm just asking you not to stick your nose into what I would teach my own children, on my own time, in my own home.

Your prejudice against reality and academia does cause you to make some silly statements.

Just what do you think science is? If scientists already knew everything, they would be out of a job. Science is asking questions about stuff we don't know yet.
 
We dont need national standards, thats what got us into this mess in the first place. Everybody is argueing about what should go into them and be left out. The market can sort that out. Schools should be funded and controlled locally. I mean real localy. Each school should be its own entity supported by its users. That way the people who use have the most say in what goes on in it.


Tell me then why every nation that is doing better in educating its young people operates under nationally controlled educational systems?


"Local control" of schooling in the US has all too often meant that uneducated persons are running educational systems.
 
I'd have no problem with localizing textbook purchases, but I do think we need national standards on their contents.

There's an efficiency of scale lost when you don't buy in bulk, but if people want to pay more, I have no heartburn over it.

On that last, texts are bought in bulk only at the district/local level, not at the national level.
 
Your prejudice against reality and academia does cause you to make some silly statements.

Just what do you think science is? If scientists already knew everything, they would be out of a job. Science is asking questions about stuff we don't know yet.

The problem being, that's NOT the way it's presented in our schools. Science is presented in every school I've ever been associated with, by every science teacher I've ever encountered as Gospel Truth in as much as any Fire and Brimstone Baptist Preacher presents The Holy Bible as Gospel Truth every Sunday morning.
 
Your comment was good until it delved into this gross simplification of the issue.

"Belief good. Knowledge bad." is not a good argument if only for the fact that scientists often have to believe before they create or use the tools required to acquire knowledge.

Hypothesizing is not the same as believing. Believing means holding an idea dearly enough that you make decisions based on it. Thinking "I wonder if this is true... let's find out!" is not holding a belief. Even thinking "I think this is true, let's find out." is not holding a belief. Not the kind of belief we're talking about in this thread.
 
Back
Top Bottom