d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Tenessee Law Allows For Intelligent Design To Be > Taught In Class
Prev1111213
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 621
Joined: May 8 2011
Gold: 0.00
Apr 13 2012 12:34pm
Quote (JEB90 @ Apr 13 2012 05:46pm)
(WARNING: elitist use of French coming up!!!)


Member
Posts: 51,909
Joined: Jan 3 2009
Gold: 8,933.00
Apr 14 2012 07:07am
Quote (JEB90 @ Apr 13 2012 10:46am)
Gentle reminder: we're a constitutional republic, not a direct democracy.  Simply having a majority that supports your views doesn't give you (WARNING: elitist use of French coming up!!!) carte blanche to enact them.


I'm extremely well aware of the bold, and what you wrote in no way contradicts what I wrote. Having a majority DOES give you the power to enact constitutional laws. Now if you want to argue that having a creationism topic in science is a violation of the Constitution, by all means fire away, but I don't think they are unconstitutional.
Member
Posts: 40,915
Joined: Jul 8 2009
Gold: 0.00
Apr 14 2012 09:30pm
I can't even count how many arguments I've gotten into with zealots that have little to no knowledge of the very religion they are expressing.

I feel a course to educate them on these things could be beneficial to lubricating discussion.
Member
Posts: 31,203
Joined: Sep 26 2008
Gold: 0.00
Apr 15 2012 01:41am
Quote (Santara @ Apr 14 2012 05:07am)
I'm extremely well aware of the bold, and what you wrote in no way contradicts what I wrote. Having a majority DOES give you the power to enact constitutional laws. Now if you want to argue that having a creationism topic in science is a violation of the Constitution, by all means fire away, but I don't think they are unconstitutional.


Because it's teaching creation as a fact, not a possibility. It's saying there is evidence for a creator. This is different than a philosophy class or a class on world religion in the sense that students are free to reject the ideas presented to them as not in alignment with their personal beliefs. Telling them creationism is valid in the science classroom is telling students employers will be asking for this information in the same way they would ask a person if they could do calculus or specialized in biology. Creationism as science is the government establishing a religion. It infringes upon the rights of Catholics, Buddhists, atheists, agnostics, Muslims, and other protestants to be free from the government telling them how to handle their faith.

Science, on the other hand, is based upon secular observations that are universal to all faiths. That is because science looks at facts, asks all those faiths and experts for a consensus, and does not ignore facts (such as fossils). Creationism, on the other hand, tries to solve the origins of the universe through logic and fails horribly because it runs into problems with faith.

This isn't an atheist vs. theist discussion, this is a small group of individuals pushing their beliefs to infringe on others' 1st. amendment rights.
Member
Posts: 77,514
Joined: Nov 30 2008
Gold: 500.00
Apr 15 2012 08:52pm
Quote (Santara @ Apr 12 2012 06:51pm)
Well, since you put it that way, I guess liberty should be squelched, because people might not do what I think they should do with it. Makes perfect sense.


aah sorry, you're right

people should have the right to teach kids that the earth is flat, and everything is made up of the elements of earth, fire, wind and water

to prevent them from teaching these as facts to children would be to infringe upon their rights

This post was edited by duffman316 on Apr 15 2012 08:54pm
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1111213
Add Reply New Topic New Poll