Evolution vs Creation-Comparing each View

[Backglass]

Dear God, that was a freakin' long post!

Unriggable, there are Atheists (trust me on this one) that can be considered (and quite so) as a religous group. I'll get back to you on this one, got to go now.

The only people I can think of that meet that definition are those neo-athiests who want to get rid of religion. In the same sense there are Christians who feel that athiests serve the devil. They're both completely alone and nobody sympathizes with them outside of their group.

Exactly. Yes a little googling will find an "Atheists Church" and an
"Atheists Bible" but just as christians decry David Koresh as being a fringe loony, so do atheists these people.

It is a definition, not a religion. Atheists simply don't believe gods exist...nothing more.

Why must Americans refer every argument to lawyers and the Constitution?? What ever happened to simple common sense??

Isn't it obvious? Christians don't believe in common sense...they have a mystical being thinking for them.

[Frigidus]

Of course, my beliefs about Creationsism not withstanding (its a load of bollocks), I believe that you can teach creationism in classes. Just present the facts in a non-biased way and let the kids decide.

We report.
You decide.

But by teaching one particular brand of creationism you discriminate against all others. Should you have to teach every creation story believed by every religious practice? If "no" then there is no way to justify teaching any of them.

Teach the major ones, same as you don't teach kids every hypothesis put forward by evolution (there are many variants within evolution)

But what if there is a student in the class who's belief system, not a major one, has it's own interpretation of creation? He might be just as offended that his belief isn't mentioned as some Christians are when theirs isn't. He would have an excellent case for religious discrimination (as opposed to the current system in which religion is not mentioned at all). I'd even say he'd be justified to complain. Considering the potential legal issues and the absolute lack of any evidence for creationism whatsoever, why should a class on science, the pursuit of knowledge, cater to random religious beliefs, no matter how widespread they may be?

EDIT:

Why must Americans refer every argument to lawyers and the Constitution?? What ever happened to simple common sense??

Common sense arguments don't fly with the religious.

[got tonkaed]

Why must Americans refer every argument to lawyers and the Constitution?? What ever happened to simple common sense??

well i think for the purposes of a debate about teaching these topics in schools, it helps to know what the established rules are. Frankly, in a multicultural society, the notion of common sense is a bit of misguided one.

If we assume that in some way you believe that teaching creationism is common sense, then you are at odds with anyone who does not believe the biblical creation story is an accurate account. Since those people do make up a segement of the population, the notion of simple common sense doesnt really seem to apply. A persons notions of how the world is supposed to be, dont necessarily translate to appropriate social mores.

[Carebian Knight]

I want to know something, why is it that Creation can be banned from schools, but Evolution cannot?

The reason is Creation is religious, so it goes against the beliefs of atheists. But Evolution is against my religion, so why should it be allowed. This I think is why so many people support evolution, many don't know the facts about creation except what they've heard.

In the US, we have the establishment clause in the constitution. Teaching religion in a state-funded institution is illegal. Other than that, it doesn't fit into any normal curriculum (particularly science) and is something that, if you want to be exposed to it, you can go to any church you want. Evolution won't be banned from schools in the US because you don't have a right to not be exposed to science as expressed in the constitution. I suppose that you could change that if you want, but you would be cutting off the source of progress in our society. If you want to avoid science, go to church. Leave my kids the hell alone.

I don't know where your from, but here, we're required to go to school, which means I have to learn evolution if I want to graduate.

[Snorri1234]

I want to know something, why is it that Creation can be banned from schools, but Evolution cannot?

The reason is Creation is religious, so it goes against the beliefs of atheists. But Evolution is against my religion, so why should it be allowed. This I think is why so many people support evolution, many don't know the facts about creation except what they've heard.

In the US, we have the establishment clause in the constitution. Teaching religion in a state-funded institution is illegal. Other than that, it doesn't fit into any normal curriculum (particularly science) and is something that, if you want to be exposed to it, you can go to any church you want. Evolution won't be banned from schools in the US because you don't have a right to not be exposed to science as expressed in the constitution. I suppose that you could change that if you want, but you would be cutting off the source of progress in our society. If you want to avoid science, go to church. Leave my kids the hell alone.

I don't know where your from, but here, we're required to go to school, which means I have to learn evolution if I want to graduate.

OH NOES!
There's a fine line between learning and believing though.

[Carebian Knight]

Of course, my beliefs about Creationsism not withstanding (its a load of bollocks), I believe that you can teach creationism in classes. Just present the facts in a non-biased way and let the kids decide.

We report.
You decide.

But by teaching one particular brand of creationism you discriminate against all others. Should you have to teach every creation story believed by every religious practice? If "no" then there is no way to justify teaching any of them.

Schools don't teach all forms of evolution either, maybe we should stop teaching them.

[Carebian Knight]

I want to know something, why is it that Creation can be banned from schools, but Evolution cannot?

The reason is Creation is religious, so it goes against the beliefs of atheists. But Evolution is against my religion, so why should it be allowed. This I think is why so many people support evolution, many don't know the facts about creation except what they've heard.

This is the hurdle Creationists fail to go across.

Atheists are not religious. Atheism mean 'A- non -Theism religious'.
Without the religious bias, things that normally wouldn't make sense or would be blasphemous are actually clear as glass (better yet, clear as backglass). Since there is so much proof for a 4 billion year old earth and a slow evolving history, it makes sense to give that as the only P.O.V.

Not only that but creation is simple to understand so if the kids are skeptical the teachers can say "go to your priest he'll tell you all about it".

We are probably the only first world country where the majority of people in power can't jump this hurdle, and as a result we, the children are being left behind.

Nowhere in that post did I say atheists were religious. I said it goes against their beliefs, I said it's against my religion, meaning the same thing as against my beliefs.

[Carebian Knight]

I want to know something, why is it that Creation can be banned from schools, but Evolution cannot?

The reason is Creation is religious, so it goes against the beliefs of atheists. But Evolution is against my religion, so why should it be allowed. This I think is why so many people support evolution, many don't know the facts about creation except what they've heard.

Creationism can be banned from being taught and discussed in science classes because Creationism is not scientific.

Creationism can not be banned from being taught and discussed in Philosophy or comparative religion classes. The adjective that fits Creationism best is probably 'metaphysical', it fits right in with the humanities.

easy?

Most schools cannot afford more classes than the core classes, some have problems providing those. There is no reason that it can't be discussed in science, even if it is simply for the fact that it relates to science. We talk about many things in biology that have nothing to do with biology, but they do relate to it.

[Carebian Knight]

I want to know something, why is it that Creation can be banned from schools, but Evolution cannot?

The reason is Creation is religious, so it goes against the beliefs of atheists. But Evolution is against my religion, so why should it be allowed. This I think is why so many people support evolution, many don't know the facts about creation except what they've heard.

Why shouldnt something be taught simply because it conflicts with your religion ? Creation is not taught in Science classes because it has no merit, same reason that pixies and flying spaghetti monsters are not mentioned.

Exactly, I know atheists don't consider themselves a religion, but they basically are. The lack of religion is basically a form of religion in itself. So why shouldn't creationism be taught because it's agains the beliefs/religion of a few.

[unriggable]

I want to know something, why is it that Creation can be banned from schools, but Evolution cannot?

The reason is Creation is religious, so it goes against the beliefs of atheists. But Evolution is against my religion, so why should it be allowed. This I think is why so many people support evolution, many don't know the facts about creation except what they've heard.

In the US, we have the establishment clause in the constitution. Teaching religion in a state-funded institution is illegal. Other than that, it doesn't fit into any normal curriculum (particularly science) and is something that, if you want to be exposed to it, you can go to any church you want. Evolution won't be banned from schools in the US because you don't have a right to not be exposed to science as expressed in the constitution. I suppose that you could change that if you want, but you would be cutting off the source of progress in our society. If you want to avoid science, go to church. Leave my kids the hell alone.

I don't know where your from, but here, we're required to go to school, which means I have to learn evolution if I want to graduate.

And you should, it explains literally everything in life we see.

[Carebian Knight]

I want to know something, why is it that Creation can be banned from schools, but Evolution cannot?

The reason is Creation is religious, so it goes against the beliefs of atheists. But Evolution is against my religion, so why should it be allowed. This I think is why so many people support evolution, many don't know the facts about creation except what they've heard.

In the US, we have the establishment clause in the constitution. Teaching religion in a state-funded institution is illegal. Other than that, it doesn't fit into any normal curriculum (particularly science) and is something that, if you want to be exposed to it, you can go to any church you want. Evolution won't be banned from schools in the US because you don't have a right to not be exposed to science as expressed in the constitution. I suppose that you could change that if you want, but you would be cutting off the source of progress in our society. If you want to avoid science, go to church. Leave my kids the hell alone.

I don't know where your from, but here, we're required to go to school, which means I have to learn evolution if I want to graduate.

OH NOES!
There's a fine line between learning and believing though.

Hmmm, but when you learn something, don't you forever believe it?

When I learned 2+2=4, I decided that I would believe it was true from then on. I have faith that whoever decided that this was true, knew what they were doing. So doesn't that mean that learning, believing and faith are all connected.

[unriggable]

Well you should ask your teacher for evidence of evolution. What grade are you in, if its highschool they should be able to.

[Neoteny]

I want to know something, why is it that Creation can be banned from schools, but Evolution cannot?

The reason is Creation is religious, so it goes against the beliefs of atheists. But Evolution is against my religion, so why should it be allowed. This I think is why so many people support evolution, many don't know the facts about creation except what they've heard.

In the US, we have the establishment clause in the constitution. Teaching religion in a state-funded institution is illegal. Other than that, it doesn't fit into any normal curriculum (particularly science) and is something that, if you want to be exposed to it, you can go to any church you want. Evolution won't be banned from schools in the US because you don't have a right to not be exposed to science as expressed in the constitution. I suppose that you could change that if you want, but you would be cutting off the source of progress in our society. If you want to avoid science, go to church. Leave my kids the hell alone.

I don't know where your from, but here, we're required to go to school, which means I have to learn evolution if I want to graduate.

I didn't say that you didn't have to learn evolution. I said if you wanted to avoid science, go to church. There is no science there.

[Backglass]

Exactly, I know atheists don't consider themselves a religion, but they basically are. The lack of religion is basically a form of religion in itself. So why shouldn't creationism be taught because it's agains the beliefs/religion of a few.

<BUZZ> Sorry choochy...incorrect. It may make you feel better to think of it as such, but being an atheist is nothing close to being religious. You mistake passionate debate for religious zeal. No meetings, no prayer, no god, no "fellowship", no pancake breakfasts, no rummage sales, no youth group, no kneeling & wailing, no confessions, no guilt and we sleep in on Sundays. We do drink wine, however we understand it comes from grapes and would not mistake it for blood.

I am sure you do not believe in Leprechauns. Therefor by your standards you belong to an anti-leprechaun religion! Please let me know when you go to your anti-leprechaun church so I can protest your hatred of these fine little men.

[Neoteny]

Exactly, I know atheists don't consider themselves a religion, but they basically are. The lack of religion is basically a form of religion in itself. So why shouldn't creationism be taught because it's agains the beliefs/religion of a few.

<BUZZ> Sorry choochy...incorrect. It may make you feel better to think of it as such, but being an atheist is nothing close to being religious. You mistake passionate debate for religious zeal. No meetings, no prayer, no god, no "fellowship", no pancake breakfasts, no rummage sales, no youth group, no kneeling & wailing, no confessions, no guilt and we sleep in on Sundays. We do drink wine, however we understand it comes from grapes and would not mistake it for blood.

I am sure you do not believe in Leprechauns. Therefor by your standards you belong to an anti-leprechaun religion! Please let me know when you go to your anti-leprechaun church so I can protest your hatred of these fine little men.

Excellence!

[taterman]

If you belive in dinosaurs than you belive in ev. but if you still belive in creation than you are in denial

[Bavarian Raven]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jk6ILZAa ... re=related


a bit off track but this guy sums up religion and prayer as the such...

[Frigidus]

Exactly, I know atheists don't consider themselves a religion, but they basically are. The lack of religion is basically a form of religion in itself. So why shouldn't creationism be taught because it's agains the beliefs/religion of a few.

Here's a scenario: Let's say that there was a group of people who are never introduced to the idea of a God. They live the exact same way that everyone else does, only the concept of religion is foreign to them. They never really made a choice about believing in a god, but because they'd never heard of the idea they don't. Technically they are atheists in that they don't believe in a god of any sort. Are they a religion?

[comic boy]

I want to know something, why is it that Creation can be banned from schools, but Evolution cannot?

The reason is Creation is religious, so it goes against the beliefs of atheists. But Evolution is against my religion, so why should it be allowed. This I think is why so many people support evolution, many don't know the facts about creation except what they've heard.

Why shouldnt something be taught simply because it conflicts with your religion ? Creation is not taught in Science classes because it has no merit, same reason that pixies and flying spaghetti monsters are not mentioned.

Exactly, I know atheists don't consider themselves a religion, but they basically are. The lack of religion is basically a form of religion in itself. So why shouldn't creationism be taught because it's agains the beliefs/religion of a few.

Do you seriously believe that Evolution is taught just to annoy certain religious types !!!!!
I have already stated that the reason Creationism isnt taught is because it has no merit, schools dont have time to incluse every bit of irrelevent crap in lessons.

[Neoteny]

In reply to Carebian's post quoted by comic boy above: a good Democracy should protect the rights of the minority (of which Christians are not). Teaching religion in school goes against my right to not be indoctrinated by the Christian majority. That's why creationism should not be taught.

[Napoleon Ier]

Exactly, I know atheists don't consider themselves a religion, but they basically are. The lack of religion is basically a form of religion in itself. So why shouldn't creationism be taught because it's agains the beliefs/religion of a few.

<BUZZ> Sorry choochy...incorrect. It may make you feel better to think of it as such, but being an atheist is nothing close to being religious. You mistake passionate debate for religious zeal. No meetings, no prayer, no god, no "fellowship", no pancake breakfasts, no rummage sales, no youth group, no kneeling & wailing, no confessions, no guilt and we sleep in on Sundays. We do drink wine, however we understand it comes from grapes and would not mistake it for blood.

I am sure you do not believe in Leprechauns. Therefor by your standards you belong to an anti-leprechaun religion! Please let me know when you go to your anti-leprechaun church so I can protest your hatred of these fine little men.

Ignorance worthy of a Creationist.

[Backglass]

Exactly, I know atheists don't consider themselves a religion, but they basically are. The lack of religion is basically a form of religion in itself. So why shouldn't creationism be taught because it's agains the beliefs/religion of a few.

<BUZZ> Sorry choochy...incorrect. It may make you feel better to think of it as such, but being an atheist is nothing close to being religious. You mistake passionate debate for religious zeal. No meetings, no prayer, no god, no "fellowship", no pancake breakfasts, no rummage sales, no youth group, no kneeling & wailing, no confessions, no guilt and we sleep in on Sundays. We do drink wine, however we understand it comes from grapes and would not mistake it for blood.

I am sure you do not believe in Leprechauns. Therefor by your standards you belong to an anti-leprechaun religion! Please let me know when you go to your anti-leprechaun church so I can protest your hatred of these fine little men.

Ignorance worthy of a Creationist.

Arrogance worthy of a Frenchman.

[Bavarian Raven]

Arrogance worthy of a Frenchman.

or a dusty old book

[Symmetry]

The lack of religion is basically a form of religion in itself.

I'm happy to know that even though I don't follow baseball, have no interest in it, and describe it as boring and stupid if asked about it, I am actually a fervent fan of the sport.
If you don't support any baseball team, then you're actually a new team in denial.
Wait...
What?
Ah... religion.

[MeDeFe]

The lack of religion is basically a form of religion in itself.

I'm happy to know that even though I don't follow baseball, have no interest in it, and describe it as boring and stupid if asked about it, I am actually a fervent fan of the sport.
If you don't support any baseball team, then you're actually a new team in denial.
Wait...
What?
Ah... religion.

A very symmetrical analogy