Arkansas House passes unconstitutional bill putting creationism in schools (4/16/21)

[ASHES]

Like I said, you LITERALLY want to ban free expression. You are opposed to free speech. Just accept that you are on that side of the argument.

Freedom of religion and speech are already limited in the public school setting. Preventing people from violating the rights of others is not having your rights violated.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

The Government is not doing anything. The Government is making it legal to talk about it. The problem your authoritarians can't seem to grasp is that the ONLY time the state is doing anything is when it is mandating. THat goes for mandated treach AND mandated silence.

This bill would tell teachers that they can teach a religious belief, creationism, as an alternative to evolution in science class.

Using the state as a vehicle to promote specific religious beliefs is the very definition of authoritarianism. Do you believe that creationism is an alternative scientific theory to evolution?

 

[jmotivator]

It allows for teachers to place it as part of their curriculum, which means students would have to know it, could be graded on it by those teachers who "choose" to teach it.

It allows a teacher to teach what creationism is, it does not mandate that it be taught, nor does it mandate the position that the teacher must take on the subject.

Why are you so terrified of free speech?

 

[roguenuke]

It allows a teacher to teach what creationism is, it does not mandate that it be taught, nor does it mandate the position that the teacher must take on the subject.

Why are you so terrified of free speech?

You seem to not understand how a classroom works. When the teachers teach things to their students, those students have to learn it, whether it is mandated the teacher teaches it or simply allowed for the teacher to teach it. The students should not be forced to learn such things simply because their teacher may be one who chooses to teach their religious beliefs as if it is an alternative to science, a scientific Theory. That is the issue. My kids should not be forced to be graded by their (religious) science teacher to be graded on assignments that are not at all scientific, but rather religious in nature.

 

[Mycroft]

Yes it does. You just don't want to read.

I read the entire article.

Look. All you have to do is provide a quote from the article. Do it...or don't. I don't care.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Freedom of religion and speech are already limited in the public school setting. Preventing people from violating the rights of others is not having your rights violated.

Freedom of expression actually isn't restricted in a public school setting. For example, in schools across Arkansas, Fellowship of Christian Athletes students will gather around the flagpole every morning and pray. Athletes regularly pray with their fellow athletes before games. Teachers pray before they eat. Some teachers have bible studies with other teachers during their breaks.

What you cannot do is use the state as a vehicle to promote or endorse religious beliefs. So a teacher can be a creationist. A teacher can lead a bible study every evening if they want. A teacher can pray themselves if they want, even during class. What a teacher cannot do is use their office as a government employee to promote their religious beliefs.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

It allows a teacher to teach what creationism is, it does not mandate that it be taught, nor does it mandate the position that the teacher must take on the subject.

Why are you so terrified of free speech?

Using the government to promote religious belief is not free speech. Freedom of expression actually isn't restricted in a public school setting. For example, in schools across Arkansas, Fellowship of Christian Athletes students will gather around the flagpole every morning and pray. Athletes regularly pray with their fellow athletes before games. Teachers pray before they eat. Some teachers have bible studies with other teachers during their breaks.

What you cannot do is use the state as a vehicle to promote or endorse religious beliefs. So a teacher can be a creationist. A teacher can lead a bible study every evening if they want. A teacher can pray themselves if they want, even during class. What a teacher cannot do is use their office as a government employee to promote their religious beliefs.

Again, do you believe that creationism is an alternative scientific theory to evolution?

 

[jmotivator]

This bill would tell teachers that they can teach a religious belief, creationism, as an alternative to evolution in science class.

Using the state as a vehicle to promote specific religious beliefs is the very definition of authoritarianism. Do you believe that creationism is an alternative scientific theory to evolution?

No it does not. Have you even read the bill? You out to before you look foolish.

Here is the whole bill. It contains none of what you claim it does:

 

[ASHES]

Freedom of expression actually isn't restricted in a public school setting. For example, in schools across Arkansas, Fellowship of Christian Athletes students will gather around the flagpole every morning and pray. Athletes regularly pray with their fellow athletes before games. Teachers pray before they eat. Some teachers have bible studies with other teachers during their breaks.

What you cannot do is use the state as a vehicle to promote or endorse religious beliefs. So a teacher can be a creationist. A teacher can lead a bible study every evening if they want. A teacher can pray themselves if they want, even during class. What a teacher cannot do is use their office as a government employee to promote their religious beliefs.

I'm speaking generally. For example, a school dress code is a restriction on freedom of expression.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

They don't have to be taught. The law doesn't mandate anything.

Why are you being intellectually dishonest? If a teacher chooses to teach creationism, then the teacher is using their government position to promote their religious beliefs and since its part of the class, the students are taught those religious beliefs.

 

[jmotivator]

Using the government to promote religious belief is not free speech. Freedom of expression actually isn't restricted in a public school setting. For example, in schools across Arkansas, Fellowship of Christian Athletes students will gather around the flagpole every morning and pray. Athletes regularly pray with their fellow athletes before games. Teachers pray before they eat. Some teachers have bible studies with other teachers during their breaks.

What you cannot do is use the state as a vehicle to promote or endorse religious beliefs. So a teacher can be a creationist. A teacher can lead a bible study every evening if they want. A teacher can pray themselves if they want, even during class. What a teacher cannot do is use their office as a government employee to promote their religious beliefs.

Again, do you believe that creationism is an alternative scientific theory to evolution?

Using the government to silence religion is Unconstitutional. There is no mandate from the state to demand that Creationism be taught, or that it must be taught affirmitively, all this bill does is allow teachers to talk about it.

Why do you folks fear free speech so much?

 

[ALiberalModerate]

No it does not. Have you even read the bill? You out to before you look foolish.

Here is the whole bill. It contains none of what you claim it does:

View attachment 67329315

Yes I have read the bill and I believe you are being intellectually dishonest. It says that a teacher may teach creationism as a theory of how the earth came to exist. Thus a teacher may teach a religious belief as a theory of how the earth came to exist.

Do you believe creationism is a scientific theory? Man up and answer the question.

 

[brianpatrick]

Using the government to silence religion is Unconstitutional. There is no mandate from the state to demand that Creationism be taught, or that it must be taught affirmitively, all this bill does is allow teachers to talk about it.

Why do you folks fear free speech so much?

We don’t if you want to teach it to adults.

 

[jmotivator]

Why are you being intellectually dishonest? If a teacher chooses to teach creationism, then the teacher is using their government position to promote their religious beliefs and since its part of the class, the students are taught those religious beliefs.

I'm not being intellectually dishonest, I am stating the truth. The law is not a mandate by the state to affirmatively teach religion. It is specifically allowing teachers to talk about it.

 

[Threegoofs]

No it does not. Have you even read the bill? You out to before you look foolish.

Here is the whole bill. It contains none of what you claim it does:

View attachment 67329315

I bet if people taught non-Christian creationism stories in science classes, the writers of this bill would lose their shit.

And that’s the essence of this bill.

 

[Phys251]

That's your story but 2.3 billion people disagree with you.

Science is never subject to beliefs. It needs to be the other way around. Otherwise those beliefs, like creationism, are built on a house of cards.

 

[jmotivator]

Yes I have read the bill and I believe you are being intellectually dishonest. It says that a teacher may teach creationism as a theory of how the earth came to exist. Thus a teacher may teach a religious belief as a theory of how the earth came to exist.

Do you believe creationism is a scientific theory? Man up and answer the question.

Clearly you haven't because you are making a lot of bullshit claims that don't actually exist in the verbiage of the bill.

The bill says nothing about teaching creationism instead of normal scientific lessons, it on;y says that creationism can be brought up. It says nothing about what position the teacher should take, or even mandate that it be tought.

You folks sure do hate free speech....

 

[roguenuke]

Using the government to silence religion is Unconstitutional. There is no mandate from the state to demand that Creationism be taught, or that it must be taught affirmitively, all this bill does is allow teachers to talk about it.

Why do you folks fear free speech so much?

The teacher is free to be a teacher in a religious school or a church (a Sunday school teacher) if they wish. There they can teach Creationism to their heart's content to students whose parents are okay with that. Public school is not a church or religious setting, so a teacher, being a government employee would be forcing their students to learn something that is part of their religious beliefs, violating separation of church and state.

 

[jmotivator]

We don’t if you want to teach it to adults.

Hahah, what?

 

[roguenuke]

Clearly you haven't because you are making a lot of bullshit claims that don't actually exist in the verbiage of the bill.

The bill says nothing about teaching creationism instead of normal scientific lessons, it on;y says that creationism can be brought up. It says nothing about what position the teacher should take, or even mandate that it be tought.

You folks sure do hate free speech....

It states it can be taught as an "alternate theory". Theories are part of science.

 

[jmotivator]

I bet if people taught non-Christian creationism stories in science classes, the writers of this bill would lose their shit.

And that’s the essence of this bill.

I bet you they wouldn't.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

I'm not being intellectually dishonest, I am stating the truth. The law is not a mandate by the state to affirmatively teach religion. It is specifically allowing teachers to talk about it.

It is specifically allowing teachers to use their position as public employees to teach their religious beliefs as an alternative scientific theory about the creation of the universe.
What did I state wrong in the above sentence?

 

[roguenuke]

I bet you they wouldn't.

Then why does the bill only address Creationism? Why did the bill not allow for other religious based "theories" about the creation of the Earth to be taught as alternate theories?

 

[jmotivator]

It is specifically allowing teachers to use their position as public employees to teach their religious beliefs as an alternative scientific theory about the creation of the universe.
What did I state wrong in the above sentence?

They can teach their religious beliefs or teach that the religious beliefs are bogus. There is no mandate, only the freedom to speak openly.

You folks hate the free exchange of ideas, and really don't embrace free speech at all.

 

[roguenuke]

They can teach their religious beliefs or teach that the religious beliefs are bogus. There is no mandate, only the freedom to speak openly.

You folks hate the free exchange of ideas, and really don't embrace free speech at all.

There is no legitimate "exchange of ideas" when it comes to a public school classroom and teachers related to students. The students are a captive audience of the teachers and what they teach.