Many religious creationists support the idea that both sides of an issue should be presented to kids who will then decide for themselves what is right, which is why these people let kids experience Internet pornography so that they can figure out by themselves that porn is immoral.

 

You're pulling that out of your ass. Show me a source.

lol religious right wants kids to watch porn? thats a totally new one

well, you see, liberals want their kids to go out and get first hand experience

Watever dude, it was a matter of time before this happened. Idk, i know when i have kids i will tell them what I LEARNED about evolution.

Hope you don't mind being burned at the stake by the village elders.

well, they already tried once, but i escaped....

It's a question of what should be taught where. Religions are definitely a part of a few subjects, like history, but that's not the problem.

 

It's been said that you should teach "science" in a science class, and I don't see any reason that only things that withstand the scientific method should be taught, but some places where many people are religious and need to know how their beliefs fit into science (or don't). I'd think it'd be okay to teach how ID has no scientific basis, but whatever. Nothing like having the same amount of time for ID as evolution though, maybe like 4 minutes or something.

Ah, if all were so easy... 4 minutes on ID, 4 minutes on religion, and then neither is ever mentioned again in a public school.

 

My experience seems to be quite the opposite, though. I think we spent about 4 minutes on the events leading up to World War I, while we spent about a week studying Islam.

Many religious creationists support the idea that both sides of an issue should be presented to kids who will then decide for themselves what is right, which is why these people let kids experience Internet pornography so that they can figure out by themselves that porn is immoral.

Lance and rakuenso - can't you smell sarcasm? LOL

 

good one ku

 

Ban censorship & expose kids to everything and let them make their own minds up - thats what I say

internet monotony makes it difficult

Seriously though, I think that ku has a good point. If you want kids to understand both sides of an issue and make up their own minds you can't condone censoring or biasing either.

 

Not that I would want ID taught to kids, in the same way that I would not expect any religion to be taught to kids in any state run school. In an ideal word I would expect kids to be taught about religion in school (subtle distinction - taught to - and taught about) to counteract any indoctrination at home . Only when religion is taught about in the way of comparative religion, learning about all sorts of religion, can kids be expected to make up their own minds. I know that this is a little off topic but indoctrination of any ideas is a bad thing, if it's in school or in the home. The problem is that teachers and parents have their own biases. This is a special problem with religious education teachers. I would not allow any teacher with religious convictions to be a religious education teacher if I had my way, but you probably would not find many atheist teachers that would want to teach religious education would you?

 

As stated by many of you, ID is not science so has no place in a science class.

 

But think on this - how many school teachers have religious biases, or on the other hand how many school teachers even have a good understanding of science? Do they understand that ID is not science?

Even worse - how many members of school boards who make decisions about education have religious biases, or on the other hand even have a good understanding of science. Do they understand that ID is not science?

It's going to be ridiculously difficult to control teaching about and teaching to. The religious are already grabbing random phrases highly cited publications and manipulating it such that it suits their own selfish purposes.

It's going to be ridiculously difficult to control teaching about and teaching to. The religious are already grabbing random phrases highly cited publications and manipulating it such that it suits their own selfish purposes.

That, i think, is one of my points, in an ideal world these things should be possible, but it ain't ideal

I, for one, do not trust anyone who is religious, they all have ulterior motives!