Scientists get the Message: U.S. is a Godly nation

az_bont · Post by **az_bont** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 1:48 pm

I don't know if all schools in the UK operate this way, but when I was in the last two years of comprehensive school we studied topics that weren't necessarily to do with religion, but helped to provide an insight into the opinions of others:

- The Enviroment
- Crime and Punishment
- Religion and Science
- Prejudice
- Medical Ethics
- War and Peace

Most of the lessons consisted of us reading a small amount of literature on the subject (or perhaps watching a video), and then having an open-ended discussion about it.

I would say that it was a lot more beneficial than an hour of PE or IT a week (also compulsory).

Hawq · Post by **Hawq** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 2:11 pm

Dunno I quite liked some of the games on the Archies we had in IT, once we got them to replace some of the BBC Micros, lousy sods never had Elite, we did have Zarch on the Archies though

Wagh · Post by **Wagh** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:16 pm

BoneyCork wrote:Aditionally, I think it is the duty of public school's to teach people things like this, considering how religion is such an integral part of society.

The problem is, people take this as an acceptance to teach bullshit ideas in a science class room.

az_bont · Post by **az_bont** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:53 pm

Wagh wrote:
BoneyCork wrote:Aditionally, I think it is the duty of public school's to teach people things like this, considering how religion is such an integral part of society.
The problem is, people take this as an acceptance to teach bullcrap ideas in a science class room.

Actually, I can think of only one country where this is currently the case...

Post by **Specially Cork** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 5:04 pm

Wagh wrote:
BoneyCork wrote:Aditionally, I think it is the duty of public school's to teach people things like this, considering how religion is such an integral part of society.
The problem is, people take this as an acceptance to teach bullcrap ideas in a science class room.

How completely unsuprising. You are against teaching religion in schools, and at the same time you suffer from the very arrogance it is trying to get rid of.

Smurph · Post by **Smurph** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 7:22 pm

Worship my ginormous penis, for my adderall (immaturity inhibitor) has worn off.

Wagh · Post by **Wagh** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 7:25 pm

BoneyCork wrote:
Wagh wrote:
BoneyCork wrote:Aditionally, I think it is the duty of public school's to teach people things like this, considering how religion is such an integral part of society.
The problem is, people take this as an acceptance to teach bullcrap ideas in a science class room.
How completely unsuprising. You are against teaching religion in schools, and at the same time you suffer from the very arrogance it is trying to get rid of.

Wow. I don't agree with it so I'm a moron who knows nothing about it.

UndeadDC · Post by **UndeadDC** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 9:51 pm

Smurph wrote:Worship my ginormous penis, for my adderall (immaturity inhibitor) has worn off.

I think we should crucify it.

greay · Post by **greay** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 10:23 pm

Wagh wrote:
BoneyCork wrote:Aditionally, I think it is the duty of public school's to teach people things like this, considering how religion is such an integral part of society.
The problem is, people take this as an acceptance to teach bullcrap ideas in a science class room.

I do think students should be introduced to different religions & taught their basic tenents. How they're similar, and how they're different. You can't deny that religion in some form plays a tremendous role in human history. It affects nearly everybody -- including people who don't believe in it.

Of course, it should be taught in social studies. Or have a class of its own. It's not science, and it's ridiculous to teach it there.

But just because some people think it should be taught as science doesn't mean it's not important to understand it.

Post by **Specially Cork** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:26 am

Wagh wrote:
BoneyCork wrote:
Wagh wrote:
BoneyCork wrote:Aditionally, I think it is the duty of public school's to teach people things like this, considering how religion is such an integral part of society.
The problem is, people take this as an acceptance to teach bullcrap ideas in a science class room.
How completely unsuprising. You are against teaching religion in schools, and at the same time you suffer from the very arrogance it is trying to get rid of.
Wow. I don't agree with it so I'm a moron who knows nothing about it.

No, you labelled everything as "bullcrap ideas" so you are a moron who knows nothing about it.

Wagh · Post by **Wagh** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 12:30 pm

BoneyCork wrote:
Wagh wrote:
BoneyCork wrote:
Wagh wrote:
BoneyCork wrote:Aditionally, I think it is the duty of public school's to teach people things like this, considering how religion is such an integral part of society.
The problem is, people take this as an acceptance to teach bullcrap ideas in a science class room.
How completely unsuprising. You are against teaching religion in schools, and at the same time you suffer from the very arrogance it is trying to get rid of.
Wow. I don't agree with it so I'm a moron who knows nothing about it.
No, you labelled everything as "bullcrap ideas" so you are a moron who knows nothing about it.

I labeled science ideals as bullcrap ideas. Thanks for putting words in my mouth.

As for forcing someone to learn something. I guess you've never heard of progressive schooling. Teaching to the interests of your students or getting them engaged in their learning is good. Learning for tests is pathetic drivel.

Wagh · Post by **Wagh** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 12:32 pm

Godfearing greay wrote:
Wagh wrote:
BoneyCork wrote:Aditionally, I think it is the duty of public school's to teach people things like this, considering how religion is such an integral part of society.
The problem is, people take this as an acceptance to teach bullcrap ideas in a science class room.
I do think students should be introduced to different religions & taught their basic tenents. How they're similar, and how they're different. You can't deny that religion in some form plays a tremendous role in human history. It affects nearly everybody -- including people who don't believe in it.

Of course, it should be taught in social studies. Or have a class of its own. It's not science, and it's ridiculous to teach it there.

But just because some people think it should be taught as science doesn't mean it's not important to understand it.

I guess i should rephrase my first post. Religion is fine in language arts and social studies class rooms. But it really doesn't belong in math nor in science.

Nico0020 · Post by **Nico0020** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 12:55 pm

to quote Superintendent Chalmers:

God has no place within the walls of a public school, just as facts have no place within organized religion!!!

but all seriousness aside. This issue has really been bothering me. School is there to educate, public school for that matter. The girl I am currently involved with went to a catholic school when she was younger and they did not have science class, they had "bible class". But that is because it was a private school, students should not be "forced" to learn the theory of intelligent design. It is not a theory at all, its just another way for christans to push their religion upon others but make it sound like a theory. There is no scientific fact behind it in any way, there is nothing to be taught about it.

Post by **Specially Cork** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 5:32 pm

As for forcing someone to learn something. I guess you've never heard of progressive schooling. Teaching to the interests of your students or getting them engaged in their learning is good. Learning for tests is pathetic drivel.

Any decent teacher should be able to engage children regardless of whether it is a subject of particular interest or not.

Aditionally there are certain standards of common knowledge that everybody should share, such as reading, writing, mathematics, science and cultural awareness. I'm sure education would be a helluva lot easier if a schoolday consisted of "Wayne Rooney Studies" "Fragging Technology" and "Binge Drinking Education", but it would only lead to a generation of idiots.

religion doesnt need to be taught AT ALL.

I guess i should rephrase my first post. Religion is fine in language arts and social studies class rooms. But it really doesn't belong in math nor in science.

That isnt rephrasing, its completely changing the meaning.

Wagh · Post by **Wagh** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 6:19 pm

BoneyCork wrote:
As for forcing someone to learn something. I guess you've never heard of progressive schooling. Teaching to the interests of your students or getting them engaged in their learning is good. Learning for tests is pathetic drivel.
Any decent teacher should be able to engage children regardless of whether it is a subject of particular interest or not.

Aditionally there are certain standards of common knowledge that everybody should share, such as reading, writing, mathematics, science and cultural awareness.

It's easy to say that but it really isn't true, atleast in the United States.

toastman · Post by **toastman** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 6:27 pm

BoneyCork wrote: You dont force people to be culturally receptive, you teach them to be. You may as well say Schools shouldnt teach Math because forcing somebody to be good with numbers isn't going to happen.
People will be much more open to other cultures if they actually know what they are about instead of just making arrogant assumptions.
Aditionally, I think it is the duty of public school's to teach people things like this, considering how religion is such an integral part of society.

Being mindful of other cultures comes through teaching, it isn't a built in personality trait that cant be changed.

Being respectful of other cultures and religions is something one is inclined towards or one isn't. I never had any "formal" religious education, yet I am more tolerant of other religions, cultures, and creeds than a good bit of people I do know. Why? I think it's because of a very unique conditions that came about as I was growing up. I learned to observe and empathize with other people. That and I was naturally curious about a lot of things. I had a friend in school who was Jehovah's Witness, and when I discovered certain things about him (that he didn't celebrate Christmas, etc.) instead of mocking him, I asked why.

greay · Post by **greay** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 7:08 pm

BoneyCork wrote:
religion doesnt need to be taught AT ALL.

I guess i should rephrase my first post. Religion is fine in language arts and social studies class rooms. But it really doesn't belong in math nor in science.
That isnt rephrasing, its completely changing the meaning.

Depends on if he meant that kids shouldn't be taught about religion, or taught religion (i.e., taught to practice it).

Since I'm inclined to believe that he's telling the truth, and not just making stuff up, he probably meant the former. If that's the case, the two aren't necessarily exclusive.

toastman wrote: Being respectful of other cultures and religions is something one is inclined towards or one isn't. I never had any "formal" religious education, yet I am more tolerant of other religions, cultures, and creeds than a good bit of people I do know. Why? I think it's because of a very unique conditions that came about as I was growing up. I learned to observe and empathize with other people. That and I was naturally curious about a lot of things. I had a friend in school who was Jehovah's Witness, and when I discovered certain things about him (that he didn't celebrate Christmas, etc.) instead of mocking him, I asked why.

That might be true to some extent, but I think that actually learning about people will make at least the people sitting on the fence more apt to be respectful of others.

Though it constantly surprises me, there's still a lot of religious prejudice out there. Learning that Catholics don't in fact worship the Virgin Mary and the Pope, and eat babies, would actually be learning something new for some people.

Learning true things about different people I think would be in itself a large step towards greater tolerance. Some people, granted, are simply hateful towards others & nothing's going to change that. But a lot of prejudice really is rooted in simple ignorance, and I think that's something we can fight.

Post by **|darc|** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 7:34 pm

Tasty toastman wrote:
BoneyCork wrote: You dont force people to be culturally receptive, you teach them to be. You may as well say Schools shouldnt teach Math because forcing somebody to be good with numbers isn't going to happen.
People will be much more open to other cultures if they actually know what they are about instead of just making arrogant assumptions.
Aditionally, I think it is the duty of public school's to teach people things like this, considering how religion is such an integral part of society.

Being mindful of other cultures comes through teaching, it isn't a built in personality trait that cant be changed.
Being respectful of other cultures and religions is something one is inclined towards or one isn't. I never had any "formal" religious education, yet I am more tolerant of other religions, cultures, and creeds than a good bit of people I do know. Why? I think it's because of a very unique conditions that came about as I was growing up. I learned to observe and empathize with other people. That and I was naturally curious about a lot of things. I had a friend in school who was Jehovah's Witness, and when I discovered certain things about him (that he didn't celebrate Christmas, etc.) instead of mocking him, I asked why.

Why does everyone treat Jehovah's Witness as an adjective? The guy was a Jehovah's Witness.

Ex-Cyber · Post by **Ex-Cyber** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 7:41 pm

Maybe he believed that he was the Jehovah's Witness.

Post by **|darc|** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 8:57 pm