Why should intelligent design not be in schools?

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Great point, for some science no longer matters when there's an agenda to push; some of the biggest self declared adherents of "science" are also the ones claiming that sex shouldn't be defined by biology, just by whatever one "feels like they are". Ironic.

Lol wow. It was a terrible point. And you're a joke for agreeing. That argument has nothing to do with the one you made in the OP.

Au contraire, it has to do with the Democrats' claim of truth through science.

True religion agrees with true science

In hindsight, of course.

Religion lets us know what is essential to our salvation. Some science is there, but not everything.

Religion is personal, subjective, and completely devoid of proof, having no place in secular governance – hence the Framers’ mandate.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Provided that a specific religion isn't taught but merely logical arguments for design, I don't see how it violates the 1st Amendment, especially considering that the American Founders specifically mentioned a creator in the Declaration of Independence.

Everything violates the 1st Amendment unless approved by the Democrats.

You think I'm kidding?

No, I don't think you are kidding I think you actually believe that. Unfortunately, for you, it's wrong.

Of course you don't think I'm kidding. You know it to be true, pod person that you are.

Again, I think you truly believe it. Of course you probably believed all the talk about death panels, the military attacking Texas, and Walmart tunnels.

What I believe is that modern-day Democrats are not Americans.

What you believe is a ridiculous lie, and you’re a liar for attempting to propagate it.

And what is a fact is that this is typical of most on the reprehensible right: to attack political opponents by accusing them of being ‘un-American,’ when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[tyroneweaver]

True religion agrees with true science

In hindsight, of course.

Religion lets us know what is essential to our salvation. Some science is there, but not everything.

Sure. Religion does that. In theory. If you're getting your info from the right one. Among thousands throughout history. None of which have any evidence. But whatever.

Possibly why Jesus said, to become as little children.
Basically He was saying, You don't know everything, but you know enough

Oh. So we should stop being curious, and stop looking for answers, because we know enough.

I think you put the idea of Jesus, perhaps the greatest concept invented in human history, to shame.

dayum, and I thought knight jumping was only played in chess

 

[tyroneweaver]

Because 'intelligent design' was designed specifically to get Christianity taught in schools alongside and equal to the Theory of Evolution. The purveyors of that religion see their grip on unreality slipping to reality so they've been busy coming up with whatever batshit will stick to the wall. The 'creation museum' is one such endeavor into ridiculousness. They have dinosaurs with saddles on them and children playing next to them.

There is nothing intelligent about ID except the way the fake Christians that came up with it are trying to sell it as something it isn't. They are using the big lie because their bigger lie isn't working any more. Their arguments continually lose in the debate in the public square. Myths have a tendency to slowly die out as actual knowledge is gained, and people no longer believe a snake talked or that we are all responsible for one woman eating an apple and therefore subjecting the rest of us to an eternity of torture at the hands of a flying father figure who commands all humans to love him or burn in torture forever. That is what Kim Jong IL does.

This most beautiful system of the sun, planets and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.”
― Isaac Newton, The Principia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy

I love how you dorks quote people from hundreds of years ago, continually relying on the fallacy that if someone is an authority on one thing they are the authority on all things forever. Before Darwin there were very few people who didn't believe in 'a god'. But it feels good for you to use the fallacy so you use it, and who am I to rain on your delusion. Your world is the world of lowest hanging fruit, even if it is rotten.

Better scrap that avatar then

 

[rdean]

Provided that a specific religion isn't taught but merely logical arguments for design, I don't see how it violates the 1st Amendment, especially considering that the American Founders specifically mentioned a creator in the Declaration of Independence.

Because it has no bearing on reality. We don't teach kids that it rains whenever the sky is sad, we teach them the water cycle.

Not so sure. I posted a picture of the water cycle and someone here at USMB said we've had enough of wild liberal theories.
Check this out:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/threa...y-math-for-using-letters-with-numbers.494072/

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Everything violates the 1st Amendment unless approved by the Democrats.

You think I'm kidding?

No, I don't think you are kidding I think you actually believe that. Unfortunately, for you, it's wrong.

Of course you don't think I'm kidding. You know it to be true, pod person that you are.

Again, I think you truly believe it. Of course you probably believed all the talk about death panels, the military attacking Texas, and Walmart tunnels.

What I believe is that modern-day Democrats are not Americans.

Of course you do. I'm sure there is a long list of crazy things you believe.

America is an idea they do not support. Ergo ...

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Lol wow. It was a terrible point. And you're a joke for agreeing. That argument has nothing to do with the one you made in the OP.

Au contraire, it has to do with the Democrats' claim of truth through science.

True religion agrees with true science

In hindsight, of course.

Religion lets us know what is essential to our salvation. Some science is there, but not everything.

Religion is personal, subjective, and completely devoid of proof, having no place in secular governance – hence the Framers’ mandate.

And their thanks to The Creator for it.

 

[hadit]

Provided that a specific religion isn't taught but merely logical arguments for design, I don't see how it violates the 1st Amendment, especially considering that the American Founders specifically mentioned a creator in the Declaration of Independence.

Because of the abject terror that a child might, just might, develop the idea that life on earth did not spontaneously erupt from nothing.

 

[rightwinger]

I have no issue with students being informed on the theory of intelligent design as long as it is presented with the same scrutiny that evolution goes through
Let students learn about creation theory and the lack of scientific evidence supporting it

 

[BULLDOG]

No, I don't think you are kidding I think you actually believe that. Unfortunately, for you, it's wrong.

Of course you don't think I'm kidding. You know it to be true, pod person that you are.

Again, I think you truly believe it. Of course you probably believed all the talk about death panels, the military attacking Texas, and Walmart tunnels.

What I believe is that modern-day Democrats are not Americans.

Of course you do. I'm sure there is a long list of crazy things you believe.

America is an idea they do not support. Ergo ...

I already agreed that you believe a lot of stupid things. No need for you to list them all.

 

[Coyote]

Provided that a specific religion isn't taught but merely logical arguments for design, I don't see how it violates the 1st Amendment, especially considering that the American Founders specifically mentioned a creator in the Declaration of Independence.

As long as it isn't taught as science (which it isn't) - it doesn't matter so much.

 

[ogibillm]

Provided that a specific religion isn't taught but merely logical arguments for design, I don't see how it violates the 1st Amendment, especially considering that the American Founders specifically mentioned a creator in the Declaration of Independence.

As long as it isn't taught as science (which it isn't) - it doesn't matter so much.

but why teach it at all?
school time is limited enough. there's no need to add every fantasy to instructional time along with facts.

 

[Coyote]

Provided that a specific religion isn't taught but merely logical arguments for design, I don't see how it violates the 1st Amendment, especially considering that the American Founders specifically mentioned a creator in the Declaration of Independence.

As long as it isn't taught as science (which it isn't) - it doesn't matter so much.

but why teach it at all?
school time is limited enough. there's no need to add every fantasy to instructional time along with facts.

That's true, but it could taught in an elective course like comparative religion.

 

[rightwinger]

Provided that a specific religion isn't taught but merely logical arguments for design, I don't see how it violates the 1st Amendment, especially considering that the American Founders specifically mentioned a creator in the Declaration of Independence.

Because of the abject terror that a child might, just might, develop the idea that life on earth did not spontaneously erupt from nothing.

Doesn't a creator create life from nothing?

 

[Nosmo King]

Provided that a specific religion isn't taught but merely logical arguments for design, I don't see how it violates the 1st Amendment, especially considering that the American Founders specifically mentioned a creator in the Declaration of Independence.

As long as it isn't taught as science (which it isn't) - it doesn't matter so much.

but why teach it at all?
school time is limited enough. there's no need to add every fantasy to instructional time along with facts.

Should creative writing be taught? Music? Art?

If not, why not?

 

[ogibillm]

Provided that a specific religion isn't taught but merely logical arguments for design, I don't see how it violates the 1st Amendment, especially considering that the American Founders specifically mentioned a creator in the Declaration of Independence.

As long as it isn't taught as science (which it isn't) - it doesn't matter so much.

but why teach it at all?
school time is limited enough. there's no need to add every fantasy to instructional time along with facts.

That's true, but it could taught in an elective course like comparative religion.

i guess. i just can't see how anyone is better off for learning it or worse off for not.

but since everything about it can be taught with one sentence i suppose it's not that terrible if it's introduced somewhere outside of science class

 

[ogibillm]

Provided that a specific religion isn't taught but merely logical arguments for design, I don't see how it violates the 1st Amendment, especially considering that the American Founders specifically mentioned a creator in the Declaration of Independence.

As long as it isn't taught as science (which it isn't) - it doesn't matter so much.

but why teach it at all?
school time is limited enough. there's no need to add every fantasy to instructional time along with facts.

Should creative writing be taught? Music? Art?

If not, why not?

absolutely. those things have value.

what value does 'intelligent design' have?

 

[Nosmo King]

Isn't "Intelligent Design" just one way of throwing our hands in the air and saying "It's too complicated to even explore for and answer!"?

 

[Nosmo King]

Provided that a specific religion isn't taught but merely logical arguments for design, I don't see how it violates the 1st Amendment, especially considering that the American Founders specifically mentioned a creator in the Declaration of Independence.

As long as it isn't taught as science (which it isn't) - it doesn't matter so much.

but why teach it at all?
school time is limited enough. there's no need to add every fantasy to instructional time along with facts.

Should creative writing be taught? Music? Art?

If not, why not?

absolutely. those things have value.

what value does 'intelligent design' have?

None.

 

[ogibillm]

Provided that a specific religion isn't taught but merely logical arguments for design, I don't see how it violates the 1st Amendment, especially considering that the American Founders specifically mentioned a creator in the Declaration of Independence.

As long as it isn't taught as science (which it isn't) - it doesn't matter so much.

but why teach it at all?
school time is limited enough. there's no need to add every fantasy to instructional time along with facts.

Should creative writing be taught? Music? Art?

If not, why not?

absolutely. those things have value.

what value does 'intelligent design' have?

None.

exactly. nobody is enhanced by knowing that some out there lack curiosity and are desperate for validation of their faith. besides, exposure to the world will teach students that quick enough.