12yo Texan Girl Told to Write that God is Fake!

[Mavorpen]

Yes, it still stands as being absolute bullshit.

Try reading the snopes article.

I did. It further solidifies that the complaints raised in the OP are bullshit.

[Xiangshu]

For the record - Atheism isn't a religion and you don't need faith to be an atheist.

It is like saying Theism is a religion, it is not. Christianity is a religion, it is structured and has a deity or some superspiritual overlord. Atheism is the lack of faith, the lack of belief in a deity, There is no 'church of Atheism' and if there was, it would be to mock religions not to actually be one.

Calling Atheism a religion is really stupid and as soon as i read that i knew i had to take all what you were saying with a pinch of salt because i knew there was going to be some pathetic far right fundamentalist propaganda being spewed forth from the ignorant bible bashing brain of yours.

Secondly, Macro-Evolution.. do i really need to argue if evolution is real.. it happened, the Big bang happened, there is evidence for both of these and there is null evidence for a god. Why should i even have to tell you this it makes me feel like there is no hope for humanity.

[Dyakovo]

viewtopic.php?p=26477850&sid=1a8e8c901005d9321fe2172ddf307a91#p26477850

The snopes article tells the story a bit differently and in more depth.

In more depth, yes. Differently, no.

[Neutraligon]

Just what the fuck kind of school teaches this shit?!

He's right. Things that are true are true regardless of whether anyone can prove that they are true. Obviously we can't know that something is a fact until we have the right evidence, but before we had that evidence it was still a fact.

Indeed.
That cat has 3 legs is a statement that can either be true or false (fact or fiction). If the cat has three legs it is fact regardless of if there is evidence it has three legs (ie no one can see the cat). If it does not have three legs, then regardless of evidence (ie no one can see it) it does not have three legs so not fact.

To determine if it has three legs though we need evidence (ie to see or touch for example).

What is being determined here is not really fact or not, but rather if a claim is justified.

[Hirota]

Just what the fuck kind of school teaches this shit?!

He's right. Things that are true are true regardless of whether anyone can prove that they are true. Obviously we can't know that something is a fact until we have the right evidence, but before we had that evidence it was still a fact.

We are getting into "If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?" territory here.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Just what the fuck kind of school teaches this shit?!

He's right. Things that are true are true regardless of whether anyone can prove that they are true. Obviously we can't know that something is a fact until we have the right evidence, but before we had that evidence it was still a fact.

I would have thought a fact requires evidence for it to be a fact.

Meanwhile it'd be a commonplace assertion, within the context of the answers provided. Given that just claiming something is true opens debate, and it doesn't really mean it is verifiable and true.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Try reading the snopes article.

I did. It further solidifies that the complaints raised in the OP are bullshit.

I don't believe Ethel agrees with the OP's article, Mav.

[Dyakovo]

Yes, it still stands as being absolute bullshit.

Try reading the snopes article.

The snopes article doesn't support your position.

[Ethel mermania]

The snopes article tells the story a bit differently and in more depth.

In more depth, yes. Differently, no.

Yes differently, from the article
District officials [said] that the 12-year-old girl's story is not the same one that other students told officials. They also say that the other students claim this reading teacher did not say there was not a God during an assignment in class. The district said they interviewed eight of the 22 students who were in that same classroom.

A reading teacher passed out a critical thinking worksheet in class. Students were instructed to pick if something was fact, opinion or common assertion. One of the statements on the worksheet read, "There is a God."

[Ganos Lao]

In more depth, yes. Differently, no.

Yes differently, from the article
District officials [said] that the 12-year-old girl's story is not the same one that other students told officials. They also say that the other students claim this reading teacher did not say there was not a God during an assignment in class. The district said they interviewed eight of the 22 students who were in that same classroom.

A reading teacher passed out a critical thinking worksheet in class. Students were instructed to pick if something was fact, opinion or common assertion. One of the statements on the worksheet read, "There is a God."

How much do people want to bet the parents saw her assigned work and thought it was lawsuit time?

[Mavorpen]

Try reading the snopes article.

The snopes article doesn't support your position.

I really don't see what's so hard to understand that the assignment wasn't about the existence of God or not. It was about the most accurate categorization of the specific claim, which is "common assertion."

[Ethel mermania]

Try reading the snopes article.

The snopes article doesn't support your position.

My position is to ask whether God is real, as part of any assignment, is inappropriate for a public school class.

The article shows that catagorizing god was part of a critical thinking exercise

[Xiangshu]

I am an atheist and i went to a primary school which forced me to pray to the christian god and jesus, even the muslims had to do it and we all had to sing christian songs and they told us god was real.

Where is my RT news segment?

[Liriena]

Blatant falsehoods regarding the nature of atheism and macroevolution asides... the article states that the teacher in question is a Christian. From what I gather, she was attempting a critical thinking exercise. Nothing more, nothing less.

Forgive me if I don't share the OP's outrage.

[Mavorpen]

The snopes article doesn't support your position.

My position is to ask whether God is real, as part of any assignment, is inappropriate for a public school class.

The article shows that catagorizing god was part of a critical thinking exercise

It wasn't asking whether God was real. It was asking to categorize the claim.

[Ganos Lao]

Blatant falsehoods regarding the nature of atheism and macroevolution asides... the article states that the teacher in question is a Christian. From what I gather, she was attempting a critical thinking exercise. Nothing more, nothing less.

Forgive me if I don't share the OP's outrage.

Critical thinking has no place in the United States. Or, at least, that is the wish of certain elements of the population.

[Fartsniffage]

I am an atheist and i went to a primary school which forced me to pray to the christian god and jesus, even the muslims had to do it and we all had to sing christian songs and they told us god was real.

Where is my RT news segment?

We used to sing Dylan and McTell songs.....it was awesome.

[Mavorpen]

Blatant falsehoods regarding the nature of atheism and macroevolution asides... the article states that the teacher in question is a Christian. From what I gather, she was attempting a critical thinking exercise. Nothing more, nothing less.

Forgive me if I don't share the OP's outrage.

I mean, most people agree that teachers shouldn't take explicit political stances and force them upon the students. Yet, one of the questions was "America is the most free country on Earth." Where's the outrage over that one?

[Ethel mermania]

My position is to ask whether God is real, as part of any assignment, is inappropriate for a public school class.

The article shows that catagorizing god was part of a critical thinking exercise

It wasn't asking whether God was real. It was asking to categorize the claim.

Which is inappropriate for a public school classroom. By categorizing god, you are making a statement about god. Simply does not belong, I don't see what is so difficult to understand.

[Ifreann]

He's right. Things that are true are true regardless of whether anyone can prove that they are true. Obviously we can't know that something is a fact until we have the right evidence, but before we had that evidence it was still a fact.

I would have thought a fact requires evidence for it to be a fact.

Does that mean that, say, Pluto didn't exist before people discovered evidence of its existence?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

He's right. Things that are true are true regardless of whether anyone can prove that they are true. Obviously we can't know that something is a fact until we have the right evidence, but before we had that evidence it was still a fact.

Indeed.
That cat has 3 legs is a statement that can either be true or false (fact or fiction). If the cat has three legs it is fact regardless of if there is evidence it has three legs (ie no one can see the cat). If it does not have three legs, then regardless of evidence (ie no one can see it) it does not have three legs so not fact.

To determine if it has three legs though we need evidence (ie to see or touch for example).

What is being determined here is not really fact or not, but rather if a claim is justified.

I would think a fact is a fact if it has been verified it is a fact.

A cat could possibly have three legs, but it very well could not. We don't know that, and the only way to know would be to gather verifiable evidence (it doesn't have to be scientific evidence, just experimental or anecdotal) to make it a fact.

However, simple claims that "God is real" or "I bought a slurpee yesterday" doesn't compose a fact, it requires more than just getting up and claiming it, at least in the department of "verifiable".

[Mavorpen]

It wasn't asking whether God was real. It was asking to categorize the claim.

Which is inappropriate for a public school classroom.

It really isn't.

By categorizing god, you are making a statement about god.

Okay.

Simply does not belong, I don't see what is so difficult to understand.

You can keep repeating it doesn't belong all you want. It doesn't change that it's not what you're complaining that it is. You're not making a statement about God. You're making a statement about the CLAIM. If you can't differentiate between those two things, that's not a problem with the assignment, that's your problem and is at the heart of the assignment: critical thinking.

[Ethel mermania]

I am an atheist and i went to a primary school which forced me to pray to the christian god and jesus, even the muslims had to do it and we all had to sing christian songs and they told us god was real.

Where is my RT news segment?

We used to sing Dylan and McTell songs.....it was awesome. [/quote]
We sang Tom lehrer,

[Soldati Senza Confini]

I would have thought a fact requires evidence for it to be a fact.

Does that mean that, say, Pluto didn't exist before people discovered evidence of its existence?

No, but before people discovered the evidence of its existence the people who would have said that Pluto exists as a fact would have met with skepticism about their fact because nobody else can see Pluto.

A fact depends solely on available knowledge at the time, because the distinction between a fact and an opinion is a human construct. It does not depend on whether or not someone randomly makes the claim. It rests solely on whether or not the person can prove their claim with a degree of verifiability. Or whether or not a claim corresponds to a fact.

If it was that easy, as you say, to prove the existence of Pluto, that people could just say it without verification, then "God must be real" is a fact then even though there is no verifiable evidence to make that statement.

[Ethel mermania]

Which is inappropriate for a public school classroom.

It really isn't.

By categorizing god, you are making a statement about god.

Okay.

Simply does not belong, I don't see what is so difficult to understand.

You can keep repeating it doesn't belong all you want. It doesn't change that it's not what you're complaining that it is. You're not making a statement about God. You're making a statement about the CLAIM. If you can't differentiate between those two things, that's not a problem with the assignment, that's your problem and is at the heart of the assignment: critical thinking.

That you can't understand a claim about god, is talking about god, I can't help, I am done talking to you.