Alpha Centauri 2

Community => Recreation Commons => Our researchers have made a breakthrough! => Topic started by: Buster's Uncle on January 22, 2014, 07:55:26 pm

Title: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Buster's Uncle on January 22, 2014, 07:55:26 pm
Creationism again stalks the classroom
By Michael Hiltzik  January 21, 2014, 4:47 p.m.


(http://www.trbimg.com/img-52df14e0/turbine/la-fi-mh-creationism-20140121-001/600)
Texas Gov. Rick Perry: His state's kids won't be competing with your kids. (Michael Justus/AP / January 21, 2014)



In a sane world, the ringing denunciation of intelligent design and creationist "science" delivered by a federal judge in 2005 would have eradicated these concepts from the schoolroom.

District Judge John E. Jones III of Harrisburg, Pa., ruled then that "intelligent design" is not science, "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents," and therefore is unconstitutional as a subject to be taught in a public school.

Yet the creationists keep at it. A recent report, written for Slate.com by the indefatigable and implausibly youthful Zack Kopplin, involves a network of charter schools with an enrollment of 17,000 students in Texas, Arkansas, and Indiana and an incredible haul of $82.6 million a year in state, local and federal funds.

As Kopplin reports, the biology workbook assigned to students in the schools operated by Responsive Education Solutions is shot through with creationist propaganda. Among its assertions: "Evolution — which is, after all, an unproved theory — has been treated as fact. It has reached the level of dogma, widely accepted, but unproven and changing school of thought that is treated as though it were fact."

Its section on "The Origin of Life" asserts: "There are only two ways that life could have begun: "1 - Spontaneous generation - random chemical processes formed the first cell. 2 - Supernatural intervention created the first cell."

As for the first living cell, the text blithers on, scientists "can only hypothesize what it might have been like." Thus it craftily attempts to undermine the scientific method. On the other hand, it says, "for many, supernatural creation (either by God or some other supernatural power) of the first cell is a more plausible explanation."

One way to react to a school system that places "supernatural intervention" on the same scientific plane as a natural process, however dopily described, is with relief that these 17,000 children won't be equipped to compete in the real world with our kids. Life in modern America is hard enough, so there's something Darwinian indeed about saddling all those kids with the burden of a 16th-century education.

Another way is to express dismay that taxpayer funds, including money paid by federal taxpayers, is going to this sort of effort.

In a reply to the Slate article posted in the Arkansas Times, Responsive Education Chief Executive Chuck Cook maintained that "the curriculum was simply providing examples of competing theories on the origin of life." He states, "Our science curriculum does examine all sides of the scientific evidence relating to the theory of evolution — both for and against — just as we are required to do by the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills for Biology."

Jones took the measure of this "we're only teaching both sides" attack on evolution. In the case before him, a disclaimer read to school pupils in Dover, Pa., at the outset of their study of evolution, "while encouraging students to keep an open mind and explore alternatives to evolution ... offers no scientific alternative; instead, the only alternative offered is an inherently religious one."

Same here: The choice offered the schools' students is between evolution, which is chock full of uncertainties according to the text, or the supernatural.

Textbook publishers and responsible parents have finally started pushing back against Texas textbook standards, which because of the state's economic heft threatened to spread unscientific pap throughout the biology curricula of public schools nationwide.

Just last November, the Texas Board of Education approved high school texts from 14 publishers that had refused to water down their treatment of evolution. "None of those textbooks call into question the overwhelming evidence supporting evolution and climate change science," the watchdog group Texas Freedom Network reported.

But as the charter school case shows, creationism still has a way of sneaking in the back door. It's still not safe for parents to let down their guard. And it's high time that federal education officials took a closer look at what's being done with our money.


http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-creationism-20140121,0,7617205.story#ixzz2r9sUGHA6 (http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-creationism-20140121,0,7617205.story#ixzz2r9sUGHA6)
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Geo on January 22, 2014, 10:32:39 pm
 ;lol
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Buster's Uncle on January 22, 2014, 10:55:19 pm
I had to go tell Mylochka about that caption.
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Geo on January 23, 2014, 10:11:41 am
I had to go tell Mylochka about that caption.

That took you 3 hours? (the time between yout two posts in this thread) ;)
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: gwillybj on January 23, 2014, 02:25:11 pm
Believe it or not, some creationists play 4x games and read the forums.
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Mart on January 23, 2014, 02:38:15 pm
One of the thing, that is very interesting to me, is that according to Bible, people were living around 900 years before the flood. And when I read or listen to the reasoning, it all make sense. The thing is, that we do not really know what the Biblical Deluge was. Creationists have a theory and it is very realistic. And I will tell one more thing. In my opinion, we approach technological development when our civilization could reverse the flood. And then, it might be possible, that human life span would return to 900 years. Sounds impossible? Not for me anymore.
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Geo on January 23, 2014, 05:55:59 pm
One of the thing, that is very interesting to me, is that according to Bible, people were living around 900 years before the flood. And when I read or listen to the reasoning, it all make sense. The thing is, that we do not really know what the Biblical Deluge was. Creationists have a theory and it is very realistic. And I will tell one more thing. In my opinion, we approach technological development when our civilization could reverse the flood. And then, it might be possible, that human life span would return to 900 years. Sounds impossible? Not for me anymore.

My take is the floodgates won't be able to coop with humans living for 9 centuries. :P

Believe it or not, some creationists play 4x games and read the forums.

Well, I guess they view the news, discovery channel, and other results of scientific wonders as well. :dunno:
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Buster's Uncle on January 23, 2014, 06:21:36 pm
I had to go tell Mylochka about that caption.

That took you 3 hours? (the time between yout two posts in this thread) ;)
No, I ran and told her before I finished posting the article. ;)
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: gwillybj on January 23, 2014, 09:49:48 pm
Believe it or not, some creationists play 4x games and read the forums.

Well, I guess they view the news, discovery channel, and other results of scientific wonders as well. :dunno:

That statment is correct. Creationism and science are not mutually exclusive. I thoroughly enjoy viewing and reading scientific material and seeing how true are the words of Psalm 19:1 (The heavens are declaring the glory of God; and the work of his hands the expanse is telling.) and 139:14 (I shall laud you because in a fear-inspiring way I am wonderfully made. Your works are wonderful, as my soul is very well aware.).
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Buster's Uncle on January 23, 2014, 10:03:37 pm
Would you agree, then, that a matter of religious faith has no place being taught in a classroom run by the government?
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: gwillybj on January 24, 2014, 02:37:47 pm
Would you agree, then, that a matter of religious faith has no place being taught in a classroom run by the government?
Yes, I do agree with that as stated.
Also the reverse: The government has no place dictating the curriculum in a classroom that receives no government funding.
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Buster's Uncle on January 24, 2014, 02:48:24 pm
The government has a real problem with understanding that.
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Yitzi on January 24, 2014, 04:23:35 pm
Believe it or not, some creationists play 4x games and read the forums.

Creationism is ok; I used to be a creationist, until I encountered what I feel to be an adequate way to reconcile the Bible with the theory of evolution.  But pretending that it's science is not ok.

Would you agree, then, that a matter of religious faith has no place being taught in a classroom run by the government?
Yes, I do agree with that as stated.
Also the reverse: The government has no place dictating the curriculum in a classroom that receives no government funding.

Agreed with both, and I'd add a third part: If there is the demand for it, there should be schools with classes that teach religious faith (and are not funded by the government) and classes that are funded by the government (and teach nonreligious subjects.)  After all, why should taxpayers who need to give their kids a religious education be unable to benefit from school taxes on the nonreligious subjects?
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Geo on January 24, 2014, 06:13:02 pm
Agreed with both, and I'd add a third part: If there is the demand for it, there should be schools with classes that teach religious faith (and are not funded by the government) and classes that are funded by the government (and teach nonreligious subjects.)  After all, why should taxpayers who need to give their kids a religious education be unable to benefit from school taxes on the nonreligious subjects?

The problem may be that the religiously minded parents don't really want their children to hear 'scientific' lectures?
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Yitzi on January 26, 2014, 04:35:54 am
Agreed with both, and I'd add a third part: If there is the demand for it, there should be schools with classes that teach religious faith (and are not funded by the government) and classes that are funded by the government (and teach nonreligious subjects.)  After all, why should taxpayers who need to give their kids a religious education be unable to benefit from school taxes on the nonreligious subjects?

The problem may be that the religiously minded parents don't really want their children to hear 'scientific' lectures?

In some cases, that may be true, but I'm speaking of those where it isn't (which includes my own community): Parents who want their kids to learn real science, but also want their kids to learn the religion.
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Geo on January 26, 2014, 01:17:06 pm
Best of both philopsophies? :D
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Buster's Uncle on January 26, 2014, 05:39:03 pm
Well, Yitzi has it exactly right, even if you have some reason to disbelieve evolution; learn the science at school - arrange for religious instruction privately.  Matters of faith are hardly the proper domain of Ceasar.
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Yitzi on January 26, 2014, 08:08:23 pm
Well, Yitzi has it exactly right, even if you have some reason to disbelieve evolution; learn the science at school - arrange for religious instruction privately.

That has its own problems and is not what I was saying.  My position is that you should learn the science at school, paid for by taxpayer dollars, and if you want that school should be able to be a religious school that also teaches the religious instruction, not paid for by taxpayer dollars.
Title: ACLU alleges comically unconstitutional religious harassment in rural Louisiana
Post by: Buster's Uncle on January 26, 2014, 10:16:45 pm
ACLU alleges comically unconstitutional religious harassment in rural Louisiana school
The Daily Caller
7 hours ago


(http://l2.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/LH5yFHsk8OFjX.by2kvb4A--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTYwMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/Reuters/Jesus-Christ-Creative-Commons-Jim-Padgett.jpg)
ACLU alleges comically unconstitutional religious harassment in rural Louisiana school



The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Louisiana filed a lawsuit this week against a public school district in rural western Louisiana contending that school officials and at least one teacher harassed a Buddhist sixth-grade student for not adhering to Christianity.

The ACLU filed the suit against the Sabine Parish school board in U.S. District Court in Shreveport on behalf of parents Scott and Sharon Lane, reports local CBS affiliate KSLA. One of the Lanes’ children, called “C.C.” in the suit, is a Buddhist of Thai descent.

The parents claim that school officials began harassing him about his religious beliefs almost immediately after he showed up at Negreet High School.

“This particular child he had to leave that school because he was subject to repeated harassment,” said the ACLU of Louisiana’s executive director, Marjorie Esman, according to the station.

The ACLU lawsuit alleges comically unconstitutional actions on the part of teachers and administrators.

For example, explains ArkLaTexhomepage.com, the suit claims that science teacher Rita Roark routinely includes fill-in-the-blank questions on her tests such as “ISN’T IT AMAZING WHAT THE _____________ HAS MADE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

The ACLU claims that the credited answer for the question is the word “LORD.” When the Buddhist student didn’t input that answer, Roark allegedly made fun of him in front of the entire class.

The suit says Roark also called Buddhism “stupid” in a comparative religions segment.

In addition, the suit asserts, Roark told students that the Bible is completely factual, that God created the earth about 6,000 years ago and that evolution is not possible.

Beyond Roark’s classroom, the ACLU lawsuit accuses the school of regularly having Christian prayer in school and featuring all manner of Christian representations including a portrait of Jesus Christ and Bible verses that school on an electric marquee at the school’s main entrance.

The suit claims that the boy’s parents noted their objections to these overt Christian messages. Sabine Parish superintendent Sara Ebarb allegedly responded by suggesting that the kid either “change” his religious beliefs or enroll in a school some 25 miles down the road where “there are more Asians,” according to ArkLaTexhomepage.com.

The school district has released a statement in response to the ACLU suit, notes KLSA.

“The Sabine Parish School Board has only recently been made aware of the lawsuit filed by the ACLU,” the statement reads in part. “A lawsuit only represents one side’s allegations, and the board is disappointed that the ACLU chose to file suit without even contacting it regarding the facts.”

The statement goes on to say that the school district “recognizes the rights of all students to exercise the religion of their choice and will defend the lawsuit vigorously.”


http://news.yahoo.com/aclu-alleges-comically-unconstitutional-religious-harassment-rural-louisiana-141242881.html (http://news.yahoo.com/aclu-alleges-comically-unconstitutional-religious-harassment-rural-louisiana-141242881.html)
Title: Public School Crams Christianity
Post by: Buster's Uncle on January 26, 2014, 10:25:08 pm
Public School Crams Christianity
The Daily Beast
By Andrew Cohen  10 hours ago


(http://l3.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/3R_94uPBDhO3yuED8yctFw--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9ZmlsbDtoPTkwO3B5b2ZmPTA7cT03NTt3PTEzNQ--/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/TheDailyBeast/1390744249462.cached.jpg)


 
Congratulations, you are the parent of a public school student! And welcome to Sabine Parish, Louisiana. We are so happy to have your child learning with us and we are so grateful that your tax dollars have permitted us to establish the educational programs and academic atmosphere we’ve developed over the years here. Let us provide you with a brief guide about what your child’s life will be like while he or she is at school with us each day.*

Let’s start with what your child will see when she enters or departs our school. “Paintings of Jesus Christ, Bible verses, and Christian devotional phrases adorn the walls of many classrooms and hallways, including the main hallway leading out to the bus pick-up area. A lighted, electronic marquee placed just outside the building scrolls Bible verses every day.

“In the main foyer of the school, one display informs students that “ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS.” It includes several posters urging students to “Pray,” “Worship,” and “Believe,” while a poster displayed near the waiting area of the main office announces that “(I)t’s okay to pray.”

Those sparkling electronic bible verses help students follow along as “staff members routinely lead students in Christian prayer” and “also distribute religious literature to students. Recently, for example, “one teacher” gave students “copies of a book from the “Truth for Youth program… “Truth for Youth” Bibles consist of the entire New Testament and with cartoon tracts that denounce evolution, spread scientifically inaccurate information about birth control and sex, and warn students about the evils of rock music, drunkenness, pornography, premarital sex, homosexuality, sorcery, witchcraft and other subjects.” These kids these days—with their evolution and sorcery!

But if you aren’t religious, or if you aren’t a Christian, don’t worry. The school’s overt emphasis on religion—and on one religion in particular—is all perfectly legitimate and lawful under the Constitution and the First Amendment. Just ask the superintendent of schools in the parish, Sara Ebarb, who has said, “[t]his is the Bible Belt” and who asked the parents of a Buddhist student recently if he “has to be raised Buddhist” or if he could “change” his faith and suggested to them that he should transfer to a school where “there are more Asians.” Religious objectors, Ebarb has said, should simply accept the pervasive of official Christianity in Sabine Parish public schools. Easy-peasy, folks, just convert!

If your child is in sixth grade and interested in science, good news— the school has the perfect teacher for her! “Rita Roark regularly asks her sixth-grade students for professions of Christian faith in science class and teaches the Bible as scientific fact, claiming that the Big Bang never happened and that evolution is a “stupid” theory that “stupid people made up because they don’t want to believe in God.”

Instead of the theory of evolution, your child instead will learn about Roark’s “beliefs about ‘Young Earth’ creationism, informing students that the Big Bang never happened and that the Universe was created by God approximately 6,000 years ago. She also teaches here students that evolution does not exist and has stated that, ‘if evolution were real, it would still be happening. Apes would be turning into humans today.” We are indeed so blessed to have this woman of science teaching our children.

The science class is rigorous, you should know. “Roark also routinely requires students to prove written professions of faith on science exams and other tests and assignments… On one occasion, the final question on an exam presented students with the following fill-in-the-blank question: “ISN’T IT AMAZING WHAT THE _______ HAS MADE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.” (The correct answer, of course is “the Lord” but don’t worry if your child is not a Christian or otherwise doesn’t know the answer. The teacher will correct him, in front of the class, even if he writes “Lord Boda” because he is Buddhist and in sixth grade).

Here are a few tips. You can get extra credit in that class if you include “verse or religious affirmation” in your responses but be careful if you cast doubt upon Bible stories! For example, “on a handout asking ‘What mountain did Moses supposedly get the Ten Commandments from?’ Roark crossed out the word ‘supposedly’. She also has told students that the Bible is ‘100% true” and that ‘scientists are slowly finding out that everything in the Bible is accurate.’” This is convenient, of course, since, as Roark told her class recently, Buddhism “’is stupid. Speaking about the founder of Buddhism, Siddhartha, she proclaimed that ‘no one could stay alive that long without food and water.”

Does your student like math? Last year, he might have been lucky enough to get teacher Stacy Bray, who asked “her students to bow their heads and pray aloud before lunch every day. Bray selected a different student each time to lead the class in prayer and participated in the prayers herself. Another teacher, Angela Knight, leads her class in daily prayers before lunch.” Nothing like a good prayer in public school to whet your public school student’s appetite!

If your child still isn’t satisfied with the level of prayer in individual classrooms don’t fret. There is an awful lot more prayer in our school. You should know that “nearly all school assemblies begin with prayer”—at the Drug Abuse Resistance Education assembly, at the school’s annual Class Ring Ceremony, you name it. And on Veterans Day, “including the most recent, school officials invite a local Christian preacher to hold a group prayer at a mandatory faculty/student assembly honoring the Nation’s veterans.”

I’ll tell you a funny story. A family objected to all this prayer in public school recently and had a meeting with Superintendent Ebarb to voice their concerns. She “defended Roark specifically, declaring that ‘[t]eachers have religious freedom.’ She further stated ‘if they were in a different country,’ Plaintiffs would see ‘that country’s religion everywhere’ and that, therefore, they ‘shouldn’t be offended’ to ‘see God here.’” Just another reason to be thankful for Louisiana’s good graces!

And then do you know what Superintendent Ebarb did? That rascal—she wrote a letter to the school’s principle, Gene Wright, ‘stating that she approved of Wright’s practices in general and that she approved of the fact that the teachers” at the school “acted consistent with their religious beliefs.” Wright then “read the letter to the whole school over the public-address system.” I guess that’s what the Bible teaches us when it says, in 2 Samuel 22:31: “As for God, his way is perfect. He shields all who take refuge in him.” Incidentally, you can see that verse in a poster on the walls of our school!

In closing, we want again to welcome you and your child to our school district. As it also says on the walls of our school, from Phillipians 4:6-7: “Don’t worry about anything; instead, pray about everything.”

• All of the information and quotes contained above come directly from the claims and allegations made in the Verified Complaint and/or Memorandum in Support of Preliminary Injunction that were filed Wednesday in federal court in the Western District of Louisiana by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of the Lane family. Here (https://www.aclu.org/religion-belief/lane-v-sabine-parish-school-board-complaint) is the link to the complaint. Here (https://www.aclu.org/religion-belief/lane-v-sabine-parish-school-board-memorandum-support-preliminary-injunction) is the link to the Injunction Memo Brief. Here (https://www.aclu.org/blog/religion-belief/if-you-want-fit-public-school-just-become-christian) is a link to the powerful statement offered by Scott Lane, C.C.’s father, titled “If You Want to Fit in At This Public School Just Become a Christian.” And it is Lane, an aggrieved father, who gets the last word. He writes:

Quote
We don’t begrudge others their right to their Christian faith. But that’s why the separation of church and state is so important: It gives us all the breathing room and freedom to believe what we want to believe and to practice those beliefs without undue influence or interference by the government. Forcing your beliefs on another is not freedom; it is oppression.

And when official religious practices are this rampant and pervasive, like they are in Sabine Parish public schools, it is tantamount to religious discrimination. It excludes children and families of minority faiths and beliefs and creates a hostile environment for them. It undermines everyone’s religious freedom. I see that now.



http://news.yahoo.com/public-school-crams-christianity-114500832--politics.html (http://news.yahoo.com/public-school-crams-christianity-114500832--politics.html)
Title: Re: ACLU alleges comically unconstitutional religious harassment in rural Louisiana
Post by: Yitzi on January 26, 2014, 11:20:59 pm
Snip article

If you're going to be in the thread anyway to post more articles, I would appreciate a response to what I said, even if it's just an apology for accidentally misrepresenting what I had been saying.
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Buster's Uncle on January 27, 2014, 12:40:19 am
?

Well, this is definitely the internet.
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Yitzi on January 27, 2014, 01:30:27 am
?

Well, this is definitely the internet.

?
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Buster's Uncle on January 27, 2014, 02:12:08 am
The internet - where bright people, who really ought to know better, all too frequently conflate disagreement with lies and demand apologies.  Happens  often wherever us nerdz chat online, and you come irritatingly close to doing both.

(No fault of yours, but those are buttons of mine.)

Were you making an argument from fairness before?  I was asserting that my faith (and therefore, the education of my children in that regard) is my responsibility, (and not The Man's) - the two positions strike me as not being miles apart, ultimately.

Sometimes, I just don't feel like getting into it.  A simple request for reaction ("Nothing to say to my last?") would have been more polite.

Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Yitzi on January 27, 2014, 02:53:55 pm
The internet - where bright people, who really ought to know better, all too frequently conflate disagreement with lies and demand apologies.  Happens  often wherever us nerdz chat online, and you come irritatingly close to doing both.

(No fault of yours, but those are buttons of mine.)

Ah, I see the misunderstanding; I was not objecting to your own position, merely your representation of my own.  I understand that it was a mistake, but just as demanding apologies for disagreement is one of your buttons, having my position misinterpreted is one of my buttons (although to have it be by someone who's not trying to argue with me is a refreshing change, at least.)

Quote
Were you making an argument from fairness before?  I was asserting that my faith (and therefore, the education of my children in that regard) is my responsibility, (and not The Man's) - the two positions strike me as not being miles apart, ultimately.

They are not miles apart, to be sure; the important difference, though, is that your position is compatible with the way things currently work (where, if you want your kids to be taught religion in school, you have to pay double for secular studies, as you end up paying school taxes but any school that teaches religion cannot have even its secular studies funded by school taxes, so you have to pay private school tuition for that too), whereas my position is most emphatically not compatible with that set-up.

Quote
Sometimes, I just don't feel like getting into it.  A simple request for reaction ("Nothing to say to my last?") would have been more polite.

Probably, but as I said, being misinterpreted is one of my buttons.  Sorry for the rudeness.
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Buster's Uncle on January 27, 2014, 05:02:17 pm
But private schools are just that - seems to complicate things unnecessarily to combine the three Rs with religious instruction, and expect any subsidy...
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Yitzi on January 27, 2014, 07:20:00 pm
But private schools are just that - seems to complicate things unnecessarily to combine the three Rs with religious instruction, and expect any subsidy...

The problem is that otherwise, how are you going to avoid effectively creating a penalty for religious education?  Obviously the government shouldn't pay for religious education, but by the same token it shouldn't penalize it either.
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Buster's Uncle on January 27, 2014, 09:50:47 pm
No, the problem is that some people want to run sunday school and real school together.  The latter is for everyone, rendering a mixing of the two redundant.
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Yitzi on January 27, 2014, 10:57:50 pm
No, the problem is that some people want to run sunday school and real school together.  The latter is for everyone, rendering a mixing of the two redundant.

The problem is that separating them with after-school religious studies has been tried, and, at least for content-heavy religions like Judaism, does not work well.  Perhaps if there were a secular school that set its schedule to accommodate a real double schedule (so there might be religious studies in the morning half the time and afternoon the other half, or every other class slot having a break during which each student can either go to a nearby religious school for their religion or, if they're not religious or of a religion that does not require schooling, have a break or something) that might work, but nobody seems willing to do that either.
Title: Creationist Tall Tales on Human Tails
Post by: Buster's Uncle on June 02, 2014, 01:55:48 am
Creationist Tall Tales on Human Tails
The Daily Beast
By Karl W. Giberson  19 hours ago


(http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/a6sWlJrcltI9Fy6gENHNQQ--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9ZmlsbDtoPTE1MDtweW9mZj0wO3E9NzU7dz0yMDA-/http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/06/01/the-crazy-way-creationists-try-to-explain-human-tails-without-evolution/_jcr_content/image.img.135.jpg/1401598428724.cached.jpg)



On rare occasions, humans are born with tails—real functioning tails that can even be “wagged” via voluntary muscles contractions in response to emotional stimuli. Although the birth of a baby with a tail is frightening for parents and typically requires surgery, the remarkable human tail is an important part of the even more remarkable tale of our origins—namely evolution.

Human tails are part of the evolutionary baggage that we carry in our bodies, leftover from our ancestors. As we evolved through time, responding to different environmental pressures, natural selection pruned and edited, making our ancestors better at some things—like talking—while ignoring skills and characteristics that became less relevant in new contexts—like smelling. Unfortunately, natural selection has no mechanism to eliminate useless features, but traits that become irrelevant can atrophy or get co-opted for some other task since there is no longer a disadvantage when those features show up in a weakened form.

We carry the evidence of this long history in our bodies—features useful to our ancestors but, for various reasons, not to us. We have goose bumps, for example, that our hairy ancestors used to make their fur stand up straighter when they needed extra warmth or wanted to look menacing. We have muscles that some of us, including me, can use to wiggle our ears, which would be useful for locating sounds if our hearing was more acute. We have a bunched-up third eyelid in the corner of our eye that provided a transparent eye covering for our ancestors, allowing them to “blink” without have to fully shut down their vision.

We call this useless anatomical baggage “vestigial.” Every species has some of it. Flightless birds have non-functional wings. Blind fish living in dark caves have eyes that can’t see. Most pythons have atrophied useless pelvises floating inside their abdomens, not connected to anything.

Other historical markers can be found in our genes. We have a gene to make Vitamin C but, unfortunately for those sailors who died from scurvy, it is broken, so we have to get Vitamin C from our food. Chimpanzees and orangutans have the same broken gene, which can only have been inherited from our common ancestor for whom it was functional, as it still is for many animals.

Every human being embodies the history of our species in the form of stuff inherited from the past. We are walking museums of natural history but some of the exhibits are rather dreadful. And every other species—and there are millions of them—also carry vestiges of its life history.

These dreadful exhibits are the undeniable proof of evolution, linking present species with their ancestors in the clearest of ways. From Darwin to the present, the existence of bad, sinister, unintelligent design has provided powerful evidence that species were not created in their present forms but must have evolved over time—and evolved in such a way that the designs we encounter in ourselves and other species today are often the opposite of intelligent.

The presence of so much “unintelligent” design across so many species should demolish the central claims of the Intelligent Design movement. For every “irreducibly complex” thing with more design than can be accounted for by present science, there are a thousand things in nature with inferior levels of design. For every arrow pointing toward a “designer,” there are a thousand arrows pointing the other way.

How then, does the Intelligent Design movement (ID) persist, in the face of so much damning contrary evidence?

To understand this strange phenomenon, we have to appreciate that ID handles scientific evidence the way lawyers handle evidence in legal cases, namely paid to come to a foregone conclusion, no matter how poorly supported. If 1,000 people saw you commit the crime and Joe saw someone else do it, Joe’s testimony is the only one that matters to your defense lawyer. When someone from the 1,000 witnesses appears on the stand, your lawyer tries to make their integrity appear suspect, and to call their competence into question.

The weakness of any case becomes clear when the logic used to make the arguments is strained, selective and irrelevant. I have watched such tortured reasoning—much of it by a lawyer—in the aftermath of my debate with ID theorist Stephen Meyer a few weeks ago.

In the debate, I emphasized the problem of bad design that I outlined above, mentioning that bad design is common in nature and poses serious problems for ID.  I gave some examples of bad design and showed a picture of an infant with a well-formed tail to illustrate one example.

The response was exactly what one would expect from lawyers. Rather than noting that apparent bad design was common and needed to be addressed by ID—a point I have made in several debates with creationists and ID theorists and has always been met with silence—the response focused exclusively on the particular example of the human tail, as if that is all that needs to be explained. One ID spokesperson, David Klinghoffer, claimed—falsely and absurdly—that I presented it a “proof of Darwinian evolution,” on which I was “very stuck.” (It is a piece of evidence, which is quite different than a proof.) Klinghoffer then attempted to undermine the argument from bad design by undermining the image I had used to illustrate my point. The image came from an article on Cracked.com which Klinghoffer described as the “vestigial online presence of an old satirical magazine, now defunct, a knockoff of Mad.” But where the image came from is of zero import; Klinghoffer’s point does absolutely nothing to undermine the universally accepted and fully documented reality that human babies are occasionally born with tails. Google has more than a million hits—and countless images—for the term “babies born with tails.”

Casey Luskin, also of the Discovery Institute, published several pieces on humans with tails that at least engaged the phenomena of tails, instead of the pedigree of the image I used. But rather than address the actual question on the table—how can ID account for bad design?—he focused exclusively on creating a tenuous speculation that there might be no such thing as genuine human tails.

Note the reasoning process here, keeping in mind that 1) there is a consensus in the scientific community that humans are sometimes born with real tails that are evolutionary throwbacks; 2) the gene for tails has been located in the human genome is the same one that mice use to produce their tails; and 3) the issue is not the human tail, but the problem of bad design in nature.

Luskin—a lawyer—starts by noting that there is “still much debate over why tails arise during development,” but fails to mention that this debate is not about whether the tail sometimes represents the reappearance of an ancestral feature. He notes that “at least one paper” recognizes that the cause of the tail is “poorly understood.” But his next logical leap is breathtaking.

The unwanted appendages attached to babies are classified as either “true tails,” which I have been discussing, or “pseudotails,” which are birth defects that only resemble tails, like a blob of flesh hanging from the lower back. The distinction between the two is common knowledge, and nobody is arguing that pseudotails provide evidence that we evolved from a tailed ancestor.

Luskin then quotes medical journals that, although certainly reputable, are not the typical sources for discussions of evolution. The articles are appropriately tentative—“we raise the suspicion”—in suggesting that pseudotails and “true tails” might actually be the same thing. If true, this would imply that the accepted evolutionary explanation for true tails should be abandoned, which would be significant, of course. Luskin, however, makes no reference to the vast literature arguing with considerable evidence for an evolutionary explanation for true tails.

Luskin makes the best argument he can, of course, but it is piecemeal and speculative. In the face of an overwhelming scientific consensus, he finds a few lone critics with a few tentative comments and amazingly ends up with “ample evidence,” to reject the received wisdom based on a much more substantial body of evidence. “Another evolutionary icon has fallen,” he concludes.

Klinghoffer and Luskin—and most everyone in the ID movement—employ the standard strategies of knowledge denial. Cigarette companies used identical tactics for decades to deny that smoking causes cancer. Today we see these tactics used to deny the scientific consensus on the causes of climate change, the safety of vaccinating children, or the age of the earth.

The strategy is always the same: toss irrelevant mud on the offending argument—“he got his picture from Cracked.com.” Find a lonely voice and enlarge its significance—“one expert thinks there are no true human tails.” Draw certain conclusions from uncertain evidence. Pluck a pebble from a mountain and pretend the mountain is gone. And never, ever, engage the actual argument on its own terms: why is there bad design in nature?

I am not trying to keep my debate with the ID “theorists” alive, for there is no debate about evolution. The generally accepted scientific ideas I presented remain alive and well and continue to guide thinking about evolution.  What I do want to do, however, is shine a spotlight on the dangerous and slippery tools used by those who deny scientific knowledge.


http://news.yahoo.com/creationist-tall-tales-human-tails-050431615--politics.html (http://news.yahoo.com/creationist-tall-tales-human-tails-050431615--politics.html)
Title: Re: Creationist Tall Tales on Human Tails
Post by: Yitzi on June 02, 2014, 05:10:35 am
Creationist Tall Tales on Human Tails
The Daily Beast
By Karl W. Giberson  19 hours ago

I am not so certain he is justified in assuming malice rather than mere incompetence; I think we've all encountered, on various internet forums, people who confuse evidence for proof or use bad arguments out of stupidity rather than intentional obfuscation.
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Green1 on June 02, 2014, 05:22:58 am
Do not worry, Yitzi. that small parish in Louisiana in one of the articles is right south of me. Not all of us drink the Kool Aid.

The atheists (ones with actual sense) are here and will "educate them" through the courts. I am a card carrying member of a major atheist group here and they will have to relent on this pushing religion on young kids who are too young to make a good decision on this. In the US, separation of church and state is not just a good idea, it is the law of the land. If someone wants to brainwash their kid, there are numerous private schools and churches on every corner in the river parishes. Not on my tax dollar.

That said, I do believe the Bible, or any other "holy" book for that matter does have a place in the classroom. I think it would go well right alongside Beowulf, Gilgamesh, and the Greek myths as fiction.

How about a compromise. Churches do have a place. Not in the job or in a school. But there is a need for a place for folks of like minds to gather. How about you take out all the mythology legend stuff and just have a place to meet, get married, and network. Sounds like Unitarian Universalism to me or the Atheist church this guy is setting up in Lake Charles, LA.
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Yitzi on June 02, 2014, 05:46:05 am
The atheists (ones with actual sense) are here and will "educate them" through the courts. I am a card carrying member of a major atheist group here and they will have to relent on this pushing religion on young kids who are too young to make a good decision on this. In the US, separation of church and state is not just a good idea, it is the law of the land. If someone wants to brainwash their kid, there are numerous private schools and churches on every corner in the river parishes. Not on my tax dollar.

Religion definitely should not be taught by taxpayer funding.

Quote
That said, I do believe the Bible, or any other "holy" book for that matter does have a place in the classroom. I think it would go well right alongside Beowulf, Gilgamesh, and the Greek myths as fiction.

Not such a good idea, as that would amount to making atheism into the state "religion", which is against the spirit if not the letter of the First Amendment.  Better to teach it as something that's had large cultural effect, and simply not deal with the issue of its truthfulness at all.

Quote
How about a compromise. Churches do have a place. Not in the job or in a school. But there is a need for a place for folks of like minds to gather. How about you take out all the mythology legend stuff and just have a place to meet, get married, and network. Sounds like Unitarian Universalism to me or the Atheist church this guy is setting up in Lake Charles, LA.

Except that wouldn't actually fulfill the needs of the religion.  (Which, depending on the religion, might actually go quite a bit past just the stories.)  How about let them stay as they are, and keep government strictly neutral* in these matters.

*Which is not quite the same as ignoring them; neutrality sometimes takes active effort.
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Green1 on June 02, 2014, 06:08:44 am
How can lack of religion be a religion?

You teach the Bible, Koran, etc as literature. Yes, going over the effect this had on culture, art, and architecture would be something to cover and could not be ignored. The Meso-American gods like Tloloc and Queztacoatl also had a profound effect on the architecture and society of that area and time. We teach it, but it is understood that these beings are not real. YHWH is the same deal. You do not say it, but it is understood. There is no need to.  The student makes up their own mind about it.
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Yitzi on June 02, 2014, 12:47:08 pm
How can lack of religion be a religion?

It isn't really, hence the quote marks.  But it can be treated the same way a state religion is (despite not being a religion), and the idea behind the religion clauses of the first amendment is to create a level playing field, which includes not giving atheism that special status (though obviously the very possibility of such wasn't considered 200-odd years ago.)

Quote
You teach the Bible, Koran, etc as literature.

Definitely.  But there's fictional literature and nonfictional literature, and a government-funded class should not take a position on which one they are.

Quote
We teach it, but it is understood that these beings are not real. YHWH is the same deal. You do not say it, but it is understood. There is no need to.  The student makes up their own mind about it.

It shouldn't even be implicit, any more than it should be implicit that there is some god.  Let it all be unassumed in governmental institutions.
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Green1 on June 02, 2014, 12:54:12 pm
We need more people like us, Yitzi.

The world would be a better place if we did away with superstition and intolerance. Instead, replace it with logic, tolerance, critical thinking and an occasional brew.

Fortunately, with the internet, many of these hokey religions are dying out. The last bastions are the Middle East and the Southern United States.
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Yitzi on June 02, 2014, 01:04:13 pm
We need more people like us, Yitzi.

Like us?  We're very different; you're an atheist, whereas I'm a fundamentalist of the intelligent non-crazy variety who recognizes that America should not be a theocracy.
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Green1 on June 02, 2014, 01:16:39 pm
America should not be a theocracy.


Actually, we are. Plus, I am a Unitarian Universalist.

Speaking of Louisiana and theocracy, we just defeated something that boggles the mind. they wanted to make the Bible the "state book"!!!

http://theadvocate.com/home/8966081-125/bible-as-state-book-bill (http://theadvocate.com/home/8966081-125/bible-as-state-book-bill)

Quote from:  Baton Rouge Advocate

Bible as State Book bill withdrawn 
 
 


by marsha shuler

 mshuler@theadvocate.com

 April 22, 2014 

15 Comments


State Rep. Thomas Carmody Jr. pulled from consideration Monday evening a proposal to make the Holy Bible the official state book.

Carmody, R-Shreveport, told the Louisiana House he did not want the legislation to be a distraction from other important issues warranting legislators’ attention. The Legislature hasn’t tackled the state budget, resolved the controversy over Common Core or completed legislation addressing lawsuits over the cause of wetlands loss.

In a short speech, Carmody said House Bill 503, which was pending a vote by the full House, “causes some constitutional problems.” He “returned the bill to the calendar” and said it would sit there until the session ends June 2.

As Carmody returned to his desk, several legislators made a bee-line over to thank him.

Legislators still can focus on naming the mayhaw fruit tree as the official state fruit tree.

That proposal — Senate Bill 206 — has made it through the state Senate and is awaiting a House committee hearing.

Louisiana already has a number of official state symbols.

The brown pelican is the state bird. The Catahoula is the state dog. The official state flag can be found on pages 146 and 147 of “The Flag Book of the United States” by Whitney Smith.

Carmody’s HB503 had cleared a Louisiana House committee even as opponents predicted it would provoke a lawsuit.

“If you adopt the Bible as the official state book, you also adopt Christianity as the state religion,” argued state Rep. Wesley Bishop, D-New Orleans, a lawyer and preacher’s son. Establishing a state religion is specifically prohibited in the U.S. Constitution.







 





 

 


Carmody said the Holy Bible was appropriate for a state with strong religious ties.

The legislation also “recognized and acknowledged” the state motto as found in the state pledge of allegiance: “A state, under God, united in purpose and ideals, confident that justice shall prevail for all of those abiding here.”

Making the Bible the official state book quickly became the subject of dozens of editorials, commentaries, national news stories and late-night comics’ fodder. The House Municipal Parochial and Cultural Affairs Committee voted 8-5 for the measure earlier this month.

Carmody told his House colleagues that the measure, House Bill 503, started out on behalf of a constituent who wanted a specific Holy Bible named as the official state book.

The book suggested was the Holy Bible, published by Johannes Prevel, which is the oldest edition of the Holy Bible in the Louisiana State Museum system. The idea was for it to be used on special occasions, such officials’ swearing in ceremonies.

A totally different version of the bill developed during lengthy committee debate, changing the one specific Bible to encompass much more.

Representatives said the Bible that Carmody chose was a King James version. That version of the Bible, which is often used by Protestants, doesn’t include parts familiar to other denominations, such as Catholic or Orthodox churches. The committee amended HB503.

But the version still didn’t suit some committee members who said it was offensive because it did not recognize the religions of all Louisiana residents. They said all books of faith should be swept in including the Torah and Quran.

Carmody said he had discussed the revamped bill with the constituent who had sought the state book legislation before he pulled the plug on it.

He said he took the step so legislators can “focus on things more important.”
 



Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Yitzi on June 02, 2014, 03:35:23 pm
America should not be a theocracy.

Actually, we are.

 ???  We may be closer than we should be, but we aren't actually a theocracy.

Quote
Plus, I am a Unitarian Universalist.

My mistake, sorry.   :-[

Quote
Speaking of Louisiana and theocracy, we just defeated something that boggles the mind. they wanted to make the Bible the "state book"!!!

If that's as important as the state flower and state bird, I don't think that would be such a big deal.
Title: Re: Creationism again stalks the classroom
Post by: Geo on June 02, 2014, 03:39:44 pm
What are state houses in the US keeping themself occupied with??? State books, motto's, trees,... ? Don't they have better things to do?
Templates: 1: Printpage (default).
Sub templates: 4: init, print_above, main, print_below.
Language files: 4: index+Modifications.english (default), TopicRating/.english (default), PortaMx/PortaMx.english (default), OharaYTEmbed.english (default).
Style sheets: 0: .
Files included: 31 - 840KB. (show)
Queries used: 15.

[Show Queries]