• 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!

Is There Any Thing Wrong with.....

You certainly have a point there E. But I don't recall any secular teachers stating, or claiming, that evolution directly is in conflict with biblical teachings. Indeed, we've seen believers from various Christian sects in this very forum state the two are not mutually exclusive.

Secular teaching is in conflict with Genesis. I don't see why it would hurt to allow creationist scientific teachings into the curriculum. From what I read from their PhD's in science, physics, geologists and archeologist, there is no reason not to allow it into the books. Let the children and adults decide which they want to believe or perhaps do some investigations on their own. What are the secularists like yourself afraid of?
 
What the heck are you even talking about? I don't see anybody else divulging every detail of their life in any given response here, so why am I being singled out? This is getting absurd.

ETA: And that you choose to concentrate on me, rather than recognize the fact somebody was making ASSumptions speaks volumes as to just how strong confirmation bias is.


OM

Actually, everyone else is giving complete thoughts and being as clear to what they mean and believe. You, on the other hand, are vague and refuse to open up. What are you hiding?
 
Secular teaching is in conflict with Genesis.

No need to base modern education on regionally-specific myths reduced to writing during the Iron Age. That would just be silly.


OM
 
Actually, everyone else is giving complete thoughts and being as clear to what they mean and believe. You, on the other hand, are vague and refuse to open up. What are you hiding?

Again, what the heck are you talking about? I smell a red herring.


OM
 
Secular teaching is in conflict with Genesis. I don't see why it would hurt to allow creationist scientific teachings into the curriculum. From what I read from their PhD's in science, physics, geologists and archeologist, there is no reason not to allow it into the books. Let the children and adults decide which they want to believe or perhaps do some investigations on their own. What are the secularists like yourself afraid of?

Secular teaching is in conflict with just about every religious dogma. Christianity doesn't get preferential time or dogmatic special adherance. How much of that 5 or 6 hours per day do you think should be set aside to address 'all' of the conflicts involving secular teachings and all of the religious dogmas ? And which part(s) of the public curriculum should be tossed out to allot for that time...or would you rather have your kids add another hour per day to their school time ?
 
Oh? The entire concept of CORE education is to deny God. It's a product of the old USSR education system of Stalin and Lenin. The fact that our education system has been leaving out the Bible, prayer and other teachings of the Bible is encouraging the denial of God. The current education system teaches the validity and acceptance of many evil and vile moral sins. Adultery, abortion on demand, homosexual behavior, transgender behavior and many more things of evil and sin. Teaching against God and the things of God is teaching to deny God and do evil. Teaching socialism as a good thing which many high schools and universities are now teaching is evil and against God. There's a lot more too.

You keep harping about your religion of personal preference, and what is being taught, and not being taught in publicly tax funded secular schools. Are you also advocating other religions are allotted equal time in public, tax funded secualr schools ? If Not, Why not ? I ask because, if memory serves, you are Mormon ( which is fine with me ). However, as you are well aware, most mainstream Christians consider Mormons to not be 'real' Christians.
 
Secular teaching is in conflict with Genesis.

Genesis is merely mythology and much has been disproved by science. It is not that 'secular teaching' is in conflict with Genesis in as much as the facts prove Genesis wrong.

I don't see why it would hurt to allow creationist scientific teachings into the curriculum.

They aren't scientific, and Creation Science is a scam.

From what I read from their PhD's in science, physics, geologists and archeologist, there is no reason not to allow it into the books.

Many of their claims are outright fraudulent. I can recall the sacks of 'fossilised' flour found in an old water mill. They weren't fossilised, but merely solidified, and the so-called 'creation scientists' were nothing more than frauds.

Let the children and adults decide which they want to believe or perhaps do some investigations on their own. What are the secularists like yourself afraid of?

Sure, teach it as mythology in social science classes, but Creation Science bears absolutely no relationship to actual scientific enquiry.
 
You certainly have a point there E. But I don't recall any secular teachers stating, or claiming, that evolution directly is in conflict with biblical teachings. Indeed, we've seen believers from various Christian sects in this very forum state the two are not mutually exclusive.

True, I guess it depends on how closely one adheres to the creation account...I do see evolution being in direct conflict with Genesis, though...there was nothing spontaneous about God's creation of the universe imo...
 
True, I guess it depends on how closely one adheres to the creation account...I do see evolution being in direct conflict with Genesis, though...there was nothing spontaneous about God's creation of the universe imo...

Probably one of the reasons secular schools stay way from teaching religion. There are so many, and so much dissention within some religions, if they open that door, the '3 Rs' get lost in the shuffle.
 
Probably one of the reasons secular schools stay way from teaching religion. There are so many, and so much dissention within some religions, if they open that door, the '3 Rs' get lost in the shuffle.

True again...that should be left up to the parents...I would prefer no teaching of religion rather than the teaching of a select few...prayers included...
 
I would prefer no teaching of religion rather than the teaching of a select few...prayers included...

So in other words, you WOULD prefer religion to be taught in public school - so long as it's your religion. Would that be a fair estimate as to the broader context of your comment?


OM
 
True again...that should be left up to the parents...I would prefer no teaching of religion rather than the teaching of a select few...prayers included...

I really have no problem with teaching the history of various religions, and religious sects...but I would suggest it is done in HS when the kids are more intellectually developed, and can use 'electives' if they are interested in matters of religion, religious history, religious doctrine.
 
So in other words, you WOULD prefer religion to be taught in public school - so long as it's your religion. Would that be a fair estimate as to the broader context of your comment?


OM

I did not say that...in fact, the opposite...do you have comprehension problems?
 
I really have no problem with teaching the history of various religions, and religious sects...but I would suggest it is done in HS when the kids are more intellectually developed, and can use 'electives' if they are interested in matters of religion, religious history, religious doctrine.

Exactly...more of an elective course...
 
I did not say that...in fact, the opposite...do you have comprehension problems?

That is why I am ASKING if that would be a fair assessment. If there are any questions as to my comprehension of what you said, it is because it has the appearance of being contradictory.

EXAMPLE:

A)
True again...that should be left up to the parents...I would prefer no teaching of religion...

That seems pretty straightforward; you agreed with the other poster, and added that there should be NO teaching of religion.

but then...

B)
...rather than the teaching of a select few...prayers included...

You turn right around and contradict that position by allowing for an EXCEPTION to a "select few". So that obviously begs the questions which select few, and would that happen to include your religion?

As you can demonstrably see now, that has nothing to do with a "comprehension problem", and more along the lines of an apparent contradiction problem which at the very least requires clarification.


OM
 
That is why I am ASKING if that would be a fair assessment. If there are any questions as to my comprehension of what you said, it is because it has the appearance of being contradictory.

EXAMPLE:

A)

That seems pretty straightforward; you agreed with the other poster, and added that there should be NO teaching of religion.

but then...

B)

You turn right around and contradict that position by allowing for an EXCEPTION to a "select few". So that obviously begs the questions which select few, and would that happen to include your religion?

As you can demonstrably see now, that has nothing to do with a "comprehension problem", and more along the lines of an apparent contradiction problem which at the very least requires clarification.


OM

You DO have a comprehension problem...that explains a lot...
 
You DO have a comprehension problem...that explains a lot...

I just showed you and everybody else how your words have the appearance of contradiction, thus not necessarily relative to comprehension at all.

You said NO RELIGION; then turned right around in the same paragraph and allowed for an exception - "prayers included".


OM
 
I just showed you and everybody else how your words have the appearance of contradiction, thus not necessarily relative to comprehension at all.

You said NO RELIGION; then turned right around in the same paragraph and allowed for an exception - "prayers included".


OM
No, you showed you have a comprehension problem...
 
No, you showed you have a comprehension problem...

So you're going to continue asserting that your contradictory words - in black and white- somehow equate to my comprehension problem? You said one thing, then said the complete opposite. Right there, in black and white. I've re-read it several times, and it's unmistakable that you allowed for an exception immediately after saying there should be none.

ETA: Or perhaps you worded it incorrectly somehow?


OM
 
So you're going to continue asserting that your contradictory words - in black and white- somehow equate to my comprehension problem? You said one thing, then said the complete opposite. Right there, in black and white. I've re-read it several times, and it's unmistakable that you would allow for an exception immediately after saying there should be none.


OM

No, I am continuing with the assertion that you have a comprehension problem because I said no such thing...
 

Tell you what, let's put this to bed; settle it once and for all.

Do you feel that religion, any religion - "prayers included", should be allowed in public school? Yes, or no? Nothing more beyond that is required.


OM
 
Tell you what, let's put this to bed; settle it once and for all.

Do you feel that religion, any religion - "prayers included", should be allowed in public school? Yes, or no? Nothing more beyond that is required.


OM

No...
 
Oh? The entire concept of CORE education is to deny God. It's a product of the old USSR education system of Stalin and Lenin. The fact that our education system has been leaving out the Bible, prayer and other teachings of the Bible is encouraging the denial of God. The current education system teaches the validity and acceptance of many evil and vile moral sins. Adultery, abortion on demand, homosexual behavior, transgender behavior and many more things of evil and sin. Teaching against God and the things of God is teaching to deny God and do evil. Teaching socialism as a good thing which many high schools and universities are now teaching is evil and against God. There's a lot more too.

And how is the concept of 'teh CORE' education is to deny God? Can you show that this is true, without resorting to aguement from assertion and meaningless rants?
 
Back
Top Bottom