No one said they can't hear it. I have said the science teacher shouldn't treat it like it's a scientific theory. It isn't. In religion class, it's fine.
And frankly, religious theories don't change much as they are seldom questioned by the faithful. They don't adhere to the same rules as scientific theory.
Well, idk what she is really saying or trying to say, but I can't see how the average person could study evolution and then act like they can choose or its acceptable for others to choose to believe in global warming or not.
Climate change, ice ages, periods of prolonged rising temperatures, evaporating water, and levels of oxygen in the environment all play a role in shaping evolution, survival of the fittest, adaptability, extinction, etc.
Sure they are. But if you throw in a no scientific belief as if it were a scientific theory, that would be confusing and largely inappropriate.
I'm simply saying that they should cover all the bases. There are apparently a lot of people who believe in the creationist theory. It doesn't hurt anyone to give other theories an honorary mention when they are popular beliefs. Do you suggest we leave Greek mythology out of teaching because it isn't factual? As someone else stated, religion has huge societal implications and certain aspects of certainly worth mentioning and talking about from a strictly neutral and educational standpoint, as I've stated REPEATEDLY throughout this thread.
Well, Catholics do allow divorce now don't they? :lol:
Nobody suggested it should be presented as a "scientific" theory.
I really don't understand why Christians have a problem with evolution. If they take everything in the Bible literally, I kind of think they are fundamentists. If their faith makes them uncomfortable with accepted science and causes them to be naive and shun exposure to new ideas, diverse religious thought, opposing povs, and scientific studies, then i dont feel we ought to enable such fundamental attitudes.
I don't think anybody is trying to push atheism on people via science. I like science and I especially like evolution and ancient human studies, and I am not atheist.
Well, their tax money helps pay for public school funding, and it's really none of your business what other people believe or want to teach their children. :shrug: It's just simply not up to you to decide for others.
Yet some don't have a problem with actually bringing students on a field trip to a mosque? Weird.
That's what makes teaching beliefs at school tricky. At home, at church, much easier to say go for it. At a public institution? More difficult. Certainly nothing wrong with comparing cultures and religions, but choosing one as the one? Dicier.
Oh I totally agree with that, hence neutrality.
Well, their tax money helps pay for public school funding, and it's really none of your business what other people believe or want to teach their children. :shrug: It's just simply not up to you to decide for others.
When they can't tell the difference between science and their fundamental faith, and want their fundamental faith treated as a science in public schools then that kind of interferes with what I want to teach my kids.
They aren't the only people paying taxes, so I don't see what's fair about expecting everybody's education system and other public institutions to uphold their fundamental beliefs.
The education system should be concerned with promoting education and knowledge first, not promoting religious faith.
I think kids should learn science and knowledge. If fundie beliefs don't hold up to knowledge, then they need to reassess the way the look at the Bible. I am not accepting of shunning education and knowledge.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?