We should educate, not dictate belief systems, either theistic or atheistic belief systems.
Anyway you cut it, a belief system that suggests life exists with no plan or design is atheistic in nature.
We don't need scientific dogma replacing theistic dogma, which is exactly what has happened. We see controlling folks who live in fear of children being exposed to different ideas.
We finally have an opportunity to say to children, decide for yourself what you want to believe. Here are the competing theories, here is why these people believe in these theories, here are what we see as the strong and weak points of each theory....now the children can select from either of these theories, neither or these theories, a combination of these theories, etc.
Educate, don't dictate narrow minded theories as truths, educate, don't mandate a particular theory, educate, don't indoctrinate.
To me the reaction from the so called "scientific" community, or its representation here at ET by certain posters.....is absurd.
We see folks here who are chomping at the bit to tell everyone why ID is not valid. They want to shout down those who suggest alternative ideas.
Have the debate in a classroom, let the children decide what to think....
So why not expose children to both theories, let the proponents speak on behalf of each theory....then let the one who should be making the decisions, the children, decide which if any theory to embrace or reject.
Sometimes I think I must be in the old Soviet Union as controlling as folks are in the ET forums.
____________________________
On a very practical level what do we see? We see more and more children being "educated" at home or in private schools. Why is that? Because parents don't want atheistic teaching forced down the throats of their kids. All they are asking for is to have both competing theories taught, to give their kids a choice, to not have the state indoctrinating their children into a particular belief system about life. Were ID taught, they would be happy to have their kids back in public schools in many instances.
Isn't that understandable what they are doing? Wouldn't the scientific parents want to be doing the same thing if only an ID version were taught in public schools? Wouldn't they want their children exposed to the belief systems they thought important for education?
I see a major problem if parents are taking kids out of public schools, which teach more than the math, science, etc. They teach exposure to other ideas, other cultures, other kids, etc. The school system is made stronger through diversity of thought, people become better thinkers when they learn how to think about life....not when they are told what to think about life. Kids learn more about life, how to live with others through the public school system, not in cloistered environments.
This split and divisiveness is completely unnecessary, and only requires compromise from both sides on this issue.
Teach a non denominational ID, which only teaches that life is from some source of order, not random change. Let the evolutionary folks teach their view that life is a product of random chance. Even some atheists have proposed this, and ID could be taught that life is possibly by the design of aliens from another world, or human beings of billions and billions of years ago who created this solar system, etc. We don't need all the facts to teach the value of logical deduction and inference. It is not necessary to know the shape, form or specifics, it is not necessary to know the programmer to recognize that there is a code and a program running on a computer. It is only necessary to understand that life is logically possible by design, as much as it is logically possible to be by random chance.
What is the harm in offering both points of view? I really can't see it.
I only see benefit by demystifying the whole thing, and plainly and simply telling children what we know, what we really don't know, and what different people believe.
Quote from nitro:
I don't disagree with anything you said in your post. This statement warrants a response.
Wouldn't this be better served by having an ethics course be required as part of your education? Ethics (which encompasses morals) can and does encompass the wisdom of religion(s). Ethics is a branch of Philosophy and can be taught there, or it can certainly be taught as part of a Divinity course.
In other words, Sex Education (as in sex for fun and it's potential consequences, not the scientific sex-for-reproduction) is not taught in Biology class but as a separate subject, even though you learn about sex in Biology. In History class you learn about wars and killing, but no mention is made of ethics there.
Still, I catch your drift.
nitro
