Methinks your dislike of religion is blinding you from flipping that scientific coin over... ;)

(Science does not belong in a Theology classroom, nor in Sunday school, nor in church. God's Word is the only textbook needed. THAT is religion.)

There's more to religion than monotheism.

are you positive about that

evolution, what would be the reason to have dinosaur´s roaming here to some 160 000 000 years, and then wipe them out, so only birds are left, i would like to have DINO as a pet

Not sure if I'm reading this right, the question is better posed to ID as evolution is a process that acts on what's available, it does not control stellar events (and it's likely that the dinosaurs were wiped out by a collision with a meteor). The "Designer", however, probably would have such control. Were the dinos an experiment gone bad? Did the designer get bored? ID leads inevitably to such questions, evolution does not. These questions, and several others cannot be answered by scientific enquiry (hypothesis, experiments and evidence, theory, etc), so what are they doing in a science class? ID in biology is as valid today as TARDIS engine design is in a physics class.

The dinosaurs evolved into birds. They are still very much with us.

True, and crocs and 'gators, but many others became extinct without genetic descendents, so the point still stands. I guess I could've been more precise, would:
Does the KT Boundary mark a point where the Designer thought, "It's time for a radical change"?
be any better?

Please don't tell me TARDIS engine design is on the National Curriculum :-)

No..but judging by our workload I think they just assume teachers have time travelling devices already.

so many answers, and we are still in same sentence.

everybody knows and his dog that dino´s evolved in one line to the birds,
crocodiles have been ridiculously long time here, and so on, but still you can teach
evolution cause it is science, you can teach id when they have even one scientific truth behind it.
(like god or whatever exist)

Methinks your dislike of religion is blinding you from flipping that scientific coin over... ;)

(Science does not belong in a Theology classroom, nor in Sunday school, nor in church. God's Word is the only textbook needed. THAT is religion.)

There's more to religion than monotheism.

are you positive about that

Reasonably so, "God's Word" suggests one god (monotheism), other faiths/religions have multiple gods (polytheism, see there's even a word for it), and some faiths have none (religion does not imply God or gods).

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Methinks your dislike of religion is blinding you from flipping that scientific coin over... ;)

(Science does not belong in a Theology classroom, nor in Sunday school, nor in church. God's Word is the only textbook needed. THAT is religion.)

There's more to religion than monotheism.

are you positive about that

Reasonably so, "God's Word" suggests one god (monotheism), other faiths/religions have multiple gods (polytheism, see there's even a word for it), and some faiths have none (religion does not imply God or gods).

More reason to teach overviews of all religions to our educationally challenged nation.


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

(religion does not imply God or gods).

Darwinism? ;)

(But isn't it odd how it's only the monotheistic Abrahamic faiths that are continually under attack.)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

Buddhism is an example.


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Buddhism is an example.


.

Indeed, and I understand Taoism and Confucianism may be others.

Secular Darwinism would be an unlikely contender for a godless religion, and as humanists "[reject] the validity of transcendental justifications, such as a dependence on belief without reason, the supernatural, or texts of allegedly divine origin" (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism) I think it would be safe to say that they also fail to meet the bar. Perhaps a Religious education class should encompass ethical and moral belief systems, opening the doors to discussions on these and other alternatives to God.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

(But isn't it odd how it's only the monotheistic Abrahamic faiths that are continually under attack.)

But isn't generally from each other (and fequently themselves, Sunni vs Shi'ite, Protestant vs Catholic, etc)?

Though it has to be said the Abrahamic faiths have done their fair share of attacking other faiths in the past, native American culture throughout North and South America has been pushed to the fringes and many of the faiths that were practised when the Europeans arrived are now no more. Further back, Chrisitianity did a pretty good job of clearing the polytheistic religions of Europe (the Celtic Druids, Roman and Greek pantheons, the Norse, etc), and more recently the virtual destruction of African systems of belief.

Perhaps all they have now is each other.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

alternatives to God.

So are we 'one nation under God' or do we have 'religious freedom'?

We seem to claim the former, yet our actions resemble the latter... and to top it off, both stances are well documented... ;)

(Sometimes I get confused over all the confusion created by the king of confusion. God helps me through those moments.)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

alternatives to God.

So are we 'one nation under God' or do we have 'religious freedom'?

We seem to claim the former, yet our actions resemble the latter... and to top it off, both stances are well documented... ;)

(Sometimes I get confused over all the confusion created by the king of confusion. God helps me through those moments.)

I'm guessing the "we" is the US and the supreme law of the land makes no mention of God, though it does say:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

So I'd have to say we are the latter. The "one nation under God" thing appears to be a fairly modern thing, not in the original text of the Pledge. On the legalistic point, I didn't have to say those words when I made my Oath.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

The "one nation under God" thing appears to be a fairly modern thing, not in the original text of the Pledge.

You might want to brush up on your american history... ;)

(God is not on His way in, God is on His way out.)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

The "one nation under God" thing appears to be a fairly modern thing, not in the original text of the Pledge.

You might want to brush up on your american history... ;)

(God is not on His way in, God is on His way out.)

You might do the same, the under God part was a McCarthy era addition, not in the original text written by Francis Bellamy, a Baptist minister.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

the " are you positive" was a joke, sorry should have mention it

You might do the same

I already KNOW what my country stands for... no matter the claims, no matter the documentation... ;)

(We are, and always have been, a wolf in sheeps clothing... and I'm not very happy 'bout that!)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

You might do the same

I already KNOW what my country stands for... no matter the claims, no matter the documentation... ;)

You have a good memory then. Things seem different around here lately.

:D


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

You have a good memory then. Things seem different around here lately.

That I do... That they do... ;)

(But the country is what the country is.)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

Jeffrey wrote:

(God is not on His way in, God is on His way out.)


I think that She will take offense at this statement.

Regards,

Daddio

I am guessing from the responses in this thread that in US schools there is no religious education about other faiths? Here it is a core subject and pupils are required to learn about all faiths..not just their own. It helps reduce intolerance and ignorance of other cultures and religions. I can't see how that is a bad thing at all.

---

Reality Internet Personality

i don´t think that major churches would allow that happen, they simply want
to teach their own.

I am guessing from the responses in this thread that in US schools there is no religious education about other faiths? Here it is a core subject and pupils are required to learn about all faiths..not just their own. It helps reduce intolerance and ignorance of other cultures and religions. I can't see how that is a bad thing at all.

Dear god. Illinois alone has like 900 school districts.

Maybe making hideously over-large generalizations from a few posts in a thread isn't the best plan??

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...