Should religion have a place in Schools

[Norstal]

1. Creationism is not a theory and a theory is a fact. You know what's not a fact? Your religion.

A theory isn't exactly a fact. It's a probable hypothesis from observable facts. But even if so, that claim of teaching religion to enforce democracy is bullshit.

Some theory are facts actually. ALU, control-flow charts, binary sort, selective sorts, etc. are theories within my field. But they are facts as they are observable (and works).

They are facts UNTIL they are superseded by a better theory. Hence why some theories are not facts whilst some are.

[Nature-Spirits]

And if it does how should it be taught;
Extra curricular subject,
Voluntary subject,
Creationism, should it be allowed,
not at all,
blanket teach multiple religions alongside each other,
just the "main" ones,

Thoughts...?

Religion class should be voluntary, but if it is chosen the student should learn about all religions. (Multiculturalism.)

[Unchecked Expansion]

The existence of Christianity is a fact. Which says nothing about the validity of their mythology

Evolution is also a fact. Carl Sagan gives an example.

I'm on your side. Evolution is a fact, has saved lives and made millions for bio industries. It's also blindingly obvious to anyone with a small idea of genetics.
I'm just saying, the existence of Christianity is factual, but that in no way validates anything they believe as proven fact

[Samuraikoku]

Evolution is also a fact. Carl Sagan gives an example.

I'm on your side. Evolution is a fact, has saved lives and made millions for bio industries. It's also blindingly obvious to anyone with a small idea of genetics.
I'm just saying, the existence of Christianity is factual, but that in no way validates anything they believe as proven fact

Don't worry, I got you were on my side.

[Smullania]

No. Creationism, religion, and prayer should be banned in schools, if everywhere is to difficult.

[Libertarian Mesa]

Creationism is a hypothesis about how the Earth was created, a theory. And how is that Christianity is not a fact?

1. No, it's a theory because it has evidence, has been experimented, analyzed, and concluded.

2. No, it conflicts with Islam, Buddhism, Judaism, and Christianity has over 100 sects within it. One cannot be more "truer" than the other.

I apologize if I'm stupid, but I'm not sure what you mean with 2. Could you elaborate a little more please?

"God did it" will make every hypothesis ever made to be a "fact", which means that no one has to create immunization anymore. No one has to do selective breeding. No one has to treat cancer anymore. It will cause the collapse of modern civilization, increasing hunger and epidemics of diseases.

But how can evolution be tested (or creationism, for that matter)? How can we see the past?

Also, if evolution is true and the evidence is powerful, then why don't people believe in it? Evolutionary scientists should be able to support their theory of creation as strongly if the risks you mentioned is true.

[Unchecked Expansion]

Also, if evolution is true and the evidence is powerful, then why don't people believe in it? Evolutionary scientists should be able to support their theory of creation as strongly if the risks you mentioned is true.

The important ones do. The ones who use it to put food on your plate, vaccinate you against disease, give you antibiotics. That a lot of people are ignorant doesn't invalidate the truth.
Hating evolution seems to be a very American thing anyway. Even the Vatican agrees with it

[Unilisia]

No.

[Libertarian Mesa]

Also, if evolution is true and the evidence is powerful, then why don't people believe in it? Evolutionary scientists should be able to support their theory of creation as strongly if the risks you mentioned is true.

The important ones do. The ones who use it to put food on your plate, vaccinate you against disease, give you antibiotics. That a lot of people are ignorant doesn't invalidate the truth.
Hating evolution seems to be a very American thing anyway. Even the Vatican agrees with it

What do these things have to do with evolution?

[Unchecked Expansion]

What do these things have to do with evolution?

Everything. Maybe you should try and find out something about evolution before you call it wrong

[Libertarian Mesa]

What do these things have to do with evolution?

Everything. Maybe you should try and find out something about evolution before you call it wrong

Cutting the neck of a cow, cooking, and its positioning on a plate connected to a theory of how life is what it is now?

[Samuraikoku]

But how can evolution be tested (or creationism, for that matter)? How can we see the past?

Archaeology?

Also, if evolution is true and the evidence is powerful, then why don't people believe in it? Evolutionary scientists should be able to support their theory of creation as strongly if the risks you mentioned is true.

When you have faith in a religion, you're not supposed to believe otherwise, isn't that right? Evolutionary scientists can support their theory, but religious people (Creationists) won't be any less deterred since well, they believe in their own faith.

[Unchecked Expansion]

Everything. Maybe you should try and find out something about evolution before you call it wrong

Cutting the neck of a cow, cooking, and its positioning on a plate connected to a theory of how life is what it is now?

Well, for one thing it's why the cow is big, meaty and easily tamed.

[Norstal]

But how can evolution be tested (or creationism, for that matter)? How can we see the past?

1. What about antibiotics? MRSA? The more you chow down on antibiotics, the more ineffective you will be against bacterial infections. That's why antibiotics are hard to acquire.

2. You can't, but that's what carbon dating is for. Now granted, most of the experiments for this are done in a lab, but you can go to one yourself and ask for a permission. Or a museum.

Or how bout this: why'd you think the Native Aztecs were easily killed by the diseases Europeans brought and yet, the Europeans don't die?
It's because the Aztecs had not have exposure to the diseases in Europe and hence, their immune system have not evolved to counter these diseases.

Also, if evolution is true and the evidence is powerful, then why don't people believe in it? Evolutionary scientists should be able to support their theory of creation as strongly if the risks you mentioned is true.

1. I don't know. We taught it in schools everywhere.

2. We do. From simple genetic traits to pesticides, it's everywhere around us. That's why it's used extensively in food science, biology, microbiology, and medicine. No one who works in these fields truly believe in Creationism (they can believe in a god, but they believe in evolution all the same). It's how we produce new species of pest-resistant corns and everything. They can't just ask "How are we gonna make these potatoes last through the Winter?" and answer it with "God will do it!" No, they research the biomes and grow the potatoes to make it more resistant to cold.

[Libertarian Mesa]

Cutting the neck of a cow, cooking, and its positioning on a plate connected to a theory of how life is what it is now?

Well, for one thing it's why the cow is big, meaty and easily tamed.

I think so because they were bred in captivity and eat fattening foods.

[Unchecked Expansion]

Well, for one thing it's why the cow is big, meaty and easily tamed.

I think so because they were bred in captivity and eat fattening foods.

Key word. Bred.
The cows in farms today are extremely different to their ancestor species

[Libertarian Mesa]

But how can evolution be tested (or creationism, for that matter)? How can we see the past?

1. What about antibiotics? MRSA? The more you chow down on antibiotics, the more ineffective you will be against bacterial infections. That's why antibiotics are hard to acquire.

2. You can't, but that's what carbon dating is for. Now granted, most of the experiments for this are done in a lab, but you can go to one yourself and ask for a permission. Or a museum.

Or how bout this: why'd you think the Native Aztecs were easily killed by the diseases Europeans brought and yet, the Europeans don't die?
It's because the Aztecs had not have exposure to the diseases in Europe and hence, their immune system have not evolved to counter these diseases.

Also, if evolution is true and the evidence is powerful, then why don't people believe in it? Evolutionary scientists should be able to support their theory of creation as strongly if the risks you mentioned is true.

1. I don't know. We taught it in schools everywhere.

2. We do. From simple genetic traits to pesticides, it's everywhere around us. That's why it's used extensively in food science, biology, microbiology, and medicine. No one who works in these fields truly believe in Creationism (they can believe in a god, but they believe in evolution all the same). It's how we produce new species of pest-resistant corns and everything. They can't just ask "How are we gonna make these potatoes last through the Winter?" and answer it with "God will do it!" No, they research the biomes and grow the potatoes to make it more resistant to cold.

What makes the immune system of a foreign people have to do with how life is what it is? immune system must have finally learned the disease.

Also, carbon dating can be very inaccurate. See here.

[Rokartian States]

-

[Libertarian Mesa]

I think so because they were bred in captivity and eat fattening foods.

Key word. Bred.
The cows in farms today are extremely different to their ancestor species

It's because they were with people, no?

[Unchecked Expansion]

Key word. Bred.
The cows in farms today are extremely different to their ancestor species

It's because they were with people, no?

Because we bred them to pass on the traits we wanted.
So we applied a selective pressure on their population which led to the success of certain inherited traits. Which sure sounds like the basics of evolutionary theory to me

[Swampington]

"NO"

[Sovereign Spirits]

Take government out of school entirely and schools can teach whatever the hell they want. Who are you to play "Change the world to my standards", even by proxy?

[Free Soviets]

Also, carbon dating can be very inaccurate. See http://conservapedia.com/Carbon_dating# ... rstandings

i call shenanigans

[Dazchan]

How so?

One example.
When looking at a chest full of gold coins and you want to know how old it is you look for the youngest coin right.

I feel a false analogy coming on...

The younger "coins" in our universe point to it only being about 6000 years old.
The evolutionist people have found the oldest "coin" and say that is how old the universe is.

And there it is. Yes, a coin can be manufactured at a mint and spend years in circulation before ending up in the box. In the case of the Universe, the "mint" is inside the "box", manufacturing the "coins" in a completely closed system. Thus, looking for the oldest "coin" would give you a more accurate age.

Plus our population got reset to about 10 people 4400 years ago. Right about the time of Noah's flood.

Prove it,

The existence of the great flood is one of the most recurring stories on the planet.

Doesn't mean it happened.

I am going to stop ranting now.

Please do.

Another thing.
The rest of evolution says that you came from dirt.

That would be Genesis 1, not evolution.

[Libertarian Mesa]

Also, carbon dating can be very inaccurate. See http://conservapedia.com/Carbon_dating# ... rstandings

i call shenanigans

What do you mean? referring to the fact that I am using a pro-creationist source? Sorry if you do not like it, but the evolution sites will not publish creationist material.