Low IQ's and Conservative Values Linked

[bbsam]

How about "Religious History of the Western World"? "Biblical History of the Middle East"?
"Comparative Ethics"?
"Deism in Early America"?
Fact is, ID is covered extensively as a matter of historical fact in much the samway that other theories of belief and thought are covered.

 

[MrFedEx]

bbsam,

You act as there is no question or controversy concerning my question or this debate.
Ben Stein had a documentary entitled "Expelled"

Simple question: Why is the Theory of "Intelligent Design" not taught at public Universities.

I always thought Liberals were open to discuss all views and theories under their big tent.

One unproven theory is good to teach --Darwinism---Another unproven theory is not good to teach --Intelligent design ???

"Intelligent Design" is a clever attempt to re-insert religion into the schools by combining evolution with creationism. God creates, and then gives the power to adapt and evolve. It's rather curious that Intelligent Design suddenly appeared as soon as creationism was no longer taught in public schools. By the way, Intelligent Design should not be taught in public schools because it has a religious basis, at least according to the doctrine of separation of church and state. It should be taught at religious institutions like Oral Roberts, Liberty University, or your local Christian school. It has no place in a public institution.

Good try, but shot down in flames by the evil Federal Government.

 

[wkmac]

How about "Religious History of the Western World"? "Biblical History of the Middle East"?
"Comparative Ethics"?
"Deism in Early America"?
Fact is, ID is covered extensively as a matter of historical fact in much the samway that other theories of belief and thought are covered.

Great class ideas. Where do I sign up? I'd also add in Religious Studies of the ancient Middle East and Central Asia.

On the point I.D. is not taught at the college level. University West Virginia under the biology dept. teaches a course on Intelligent Design and although I've not seen the syllabus, MIT also has a course on I.D. And my local college again under the biology dept. The syllabus is for 09' but I asked and the course is still taught.

After fact check, Ben Stein should expell himself.

 

[wkmac]

2007' NOVA Special Intelligent Design on Trial

 

[804brown]

All you believers can be agnostic about evolution and the rest of us can be agnostic about the supernatural.

 

[bbsam]

All you believers can be agnostic about evolution and the rest of us can be agnostic about the supernatural.

I see no compelling reason to be agnostic about either. I really don't see a conflict.

 

[wkmac]

I see no compelling reason to be agnostic about either. I really don't see a conflict.

I would agree with that. More and more mainline christian churches see no conflict with evolution and their faith and they would be right. However, many of those churches don't hold a literalist view of the creation story so I would think this makes the process much easier.

One point I did want to make to MFE concerning an earlier comment he made in the conflict between evolution and creationism. Creationism is telling the story of how time, space and matter came to be and thus life as we know it came to be. Evolution itself IMO does not tell or suggest how time, space and matter came to be but it does tell how life as we know it today came to be. Evolution does theorize a beginning point for life, the primordial soup if you will, but there is no empirical evidence at this time to prove the exact event in which that took place. The search is still on to answer that question. As to the transitional fossil record, genetic record and other research of the evolutionary process, the evidence IMO is overwhelming but that's me.

As to the actual point of creation of time, space and matter, the debate IMO should be between the Big Bang and the Creation story. Neither side can prove an exact cause with empirical evidence of the flash point that started it all but the race now is to understand the otherside of that flashpoint and if that answer is found, it could well change the debate. Stephen Hawking fired the first salvo towards the answer to that great question. And in fairness, Hawking's views on religion and faith should be considered as well.

Also it's a general practice by some to suggest because the term "theory" is used would suggest nothing is proven but if that's the case how do you explain gravitational theory or germ theory? What about nuclear or atomic theory? Is that a fiction coming out of your wall outlet to power your computer? Did the people of Japan just dream up the events of August 1945? Just saying as a general point.

 

[bbsam]

I think "theory" is appropriate because the answers brought by science bring up more treasure troves of questions. Take the Big Bang Theory. I believe that recently it has been suggested that the universe is picking up speed away from that theoretical point. That should not be happening according to physics unless there is another force (dark matter?) at work. Is it possible that an irresistible forces is pulling the universe rather than a "bang" pushing it away?

Now the question between Creationism and Evolution seems less than credible because it consumes too much time and energy. Am I to believe that geological findings that date the earth as millions of years old somehow negate the the teachings of Christ, the faith of millions over several religions, and the general morality that seems accepted by believer, athiest, and agnostic? That just doesn't make any sense.

 

[island1fox]

Great class ideas. Where do I sign up? I'd also add in Religious Studies of the ancient Middle East and Central Asia.

On the point I.D. is not taught at the college level. University West Virginia under the biology dept. teaches a course on Intelligent Design and although I've not seen the syllabus, MIT also has a course on I.D. And my local college again under the biology dept. The syllabus is for 09' but I asked and the course is still taught.

After fact check, Ben Stein should expell himself.

Wkmac,

Not debating the pro or con of teaching I.D. --my point to bbsam is that there is a controversy and while you point out a few exceptions --overall not taught.

Would you agee the U.S does not permit gay marriage but it does exist legally in a few states -a good analogy.

For those that continually cry about seperation of church and state --I strongly agree. -------- Creator very different.

To seperate ourselves from a creator is actually impossible -unless you have a time machine and go back and change documents and facts.

"We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are CREATED equal"

"That we have been endowed by our CREATOR"

"In GOD we Trust" etc,etc,etc.

By the way for Mr fed x ---I do not care what State you live in or anyone else ---but from East coast to the Nutty West coast ---check out YOUR States Preamble. Wow --all of them begin with acknowleding a Creator or Higher being ----so much for all that seperation of State and Creator. Imagine that a sneaky way to get Religion--opps I meant Creation in the Public Square.

 

[bbsam]

Wkmac,

Not debating the pro or con of teaching I.D. --my point to bbsam is that there is a controversy and while you point out a few exceptions --overall not taught.

Would you agee the U.S does not permit gay marriage but it does exist legally in a few states -a good analogy.

For those that continually cry about seperation of church and state --I strongly agree. -------- Creator very different.

To seperate ourselves from a creator is actually impossible -unless you have a time machine and go back and change documents and facts.

"We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are CREATED equal"

"That we have been endowed by our CREATOR"

"In GOD we Trust" etc,etc,etc.

By the way for Mr fed x ---I do not care what State you live in or anyone else ---but from East coast to the Nutty West coast ---check out YOUR States Preamble. Wow --all of them begin with acknowleding a Creator or Higher being ----so much for all that seperation of State and Creator. Imagine that a sneaky way to get Religion--opps I meant Creation in the Public Square.

Since Wk has pointed out that ID is in fact taught as a theory in science at some university, it stands to reason that it is not prohibitted. Could it be simply that there is little demand from students for such a class? No sense in having a class that noone is taking. And it is not true that those who espouse ID have a "right" to be heard. As Rush Limbaugh correctly points out, people have the right to free speach but that doesn't mean anyone has to listen.

 

[island1fox]

bbsam,

With very little trouble --just Google Teaching of I.D. in Universities and colleges ---thousands of sources debating pro and con.

Just read the Cornell Universitys President on her speech that I.D. will not be taught at Cornell.

Like I stated you can always find a few exceptions ---but to deny that there is a controversy and I.D. as a theory is taught on the same level as Evolution is just wrong.


I go back to my analogy-- If you said-Gays cannot get Married in the United States --I show you Calif , Mass , N.Y. and Vermont --and then tell you there is no controversy --would be inaccurate and wrong.

If you decide not to research on your own --believe whatever you want --you are free to do that -no biggie --not looking to convert you.

My point to Liberals that always claim to have a big tent and include all --with the sheer number of people that believe in a higher being --what are people so afraid of to have BOTH theories taught ?

I am not saying to teach religions as wkmac used as an example --very different subject --I support seperation of Church and State-personally I do not support "organized Religion"

A higher being, a Creator --whatever--since it is so obviously rooted in our history --Why in many instances "BAN" the teaching of a "THEORY"

 

[bbsam]

I do not claim there is no controversy, only that I do not understand it.

I do not understand the gay marriage controversy. I think the state should stay out of marriage all together. Civil unions for everyone. Marriage left to the churches.

Same with universities. Let them handle the curriculum as they see fit.

 

[island1fox]

bbsam,
Certainly I do not claim to have all the answers. We can just agree to move on.

 

[MrFedEx]

Since Wk has pointed out that ID is in fact taught as a theory in science at some university, it stands to reason that it is not prohibitted. Could it be simply that there is little demand from students for such a class? No sense in having a class that noone is taking. And it is not true that those who espouse ID have a "right" to be heard. As Rush Limbaugh correctly points out, people have the right to free speach but that doesn't mean anyone has to listen.

ID would be illegal at a public university or any public school under separation of church and state. You could offer a college course discussing it, just as college courses are taught about the History of Islam or The History of Christianity, bt you can't teach it as fact. For example, how could you test someone as to the accuracy of ID? You can't, so the discourse would be limited to a discussion of the controversy surrounding ID.

 

[island1fox]

Seperation of Church and State is a far cry from the Theory of a being greator than us is responsible for creation.

Where is the "Church of Intelligent Design" ???

Why the big fear of teaching a THEORY ???

 

[bbsam]

ID would be illegal at a public university or any public school under separation of church and state. You could offer a college course discussing it, just as college courses are taught about the History of Islam or The History of Christianity, bt you can't teach it as fact. For example, how could you test someone as to the accuracy of ID? You can't, so the discourse would be limited to a discussion of the controversy surrounding ID.

Not sure that's factual. Wk has cited several instances wher Intelligent Design is taught at public universities.

 

[804brown]

"We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are CREATED equal"

"That we have been endowed by our CREATOR"

"In GOD we Trust" etc,etc,etc.

Written BD (before darwin).

 

[MrFedEx]

Not sure that's factual. Wk has cited several instances wher Intelligent Design is taught at public universities.

I'll bet it is only taught as "theory", as in not necessarily factual. For example, if I take Biology 100, the course will be presented as fact. An ID course could not be taught except as a concept. It would be open to interpretation, whereas a conventional course would not.

 

[MrFedEx]

Seperation of Church and State is a far cry from the Theory of a being greator than us is responsible for creation.

Where is the "Church of Intelligent Design" ???

Why the big fear of teaching a THEORY ???

Because it is a religious theory. As I said, Intelligent Design was the brainchild of the Religious Right. The objective was to get religion back into the public schools by combining creationism with evolution. The problem is that creationism is inherently religious. How hard is that to understand?

 

[moreluck]

You can't even get voters to show I.D........they'd never be able to find the church of I.D. !!